In a recent paper Christopher Heath Wellman argues that—with some important qualifications—there are no procedural rights. And it's not as if he is squeamish about his examples: even someone who is “convicted” and “punished” by lottery is not wronged—their rights are not violated—if in fact they are guilty of the relevant crime. I respond, rejecting Wellman's conclusion and argument. I also show how the discussion has important wider implications.

中文翻译：

---

为程序权利（或无论如何，程序义务）辩护：对 WELLMAN 的回应

在最近的一篇论文中，克里斯托弗·希思·威尔曼（Christopher Heath Wellman）认为——有一些重要的资格——没有程序权利。而且他对他的例子并不敏感：即使是被彩票“定罪”和“惩罚”的人也没有受到冤屈——他们的权利没有受到侵犯——如果他们确实犯了相关罪行的话。我回应，拒绝韦尔曼的结论和论点。我还展示了讨论如何具有重要的更广泛的影响。