The article discusses the link between freedom, crime and punishment. According to some theorists, crime does not only cause a person to have less freedom; it constitutes, in and of itself, a breach of the freedom of others. Punishment does not only cause people to have more freedom, for instance by preventing crimes; it constitutes, in and of itself, respect for mutual freedom. If the latter claims are true, crime and punishment must have certain meanings that make them denials/affirmations of freedom irrespective of their consequences. My aim is to show that such an immanent connection between crime/punishment and freedom exists. I do so by explicating the “natural meaning” of crime and punishment. This way of addressing the topic is inspired by Jean Hampton’s use of H. P. Grice’s concept of natural meaning. Expanding on Hampton’s theory, drawing on both H. L. A. Hart and Kant, I argue that crime has the natural meaning of denying freedom, and punishment has the natural meaning of affirming freedom. The paper presents an ideal theory, not a justification for actual criminal justice practices, which in most countries unfortunately fail to instantiate the value of mutual freedom.

文章讨论了自由、犯罪和惩罚之间的联系。一些理论家认为，犯罪不仅会导致一个人的自由减少；它本身就构成对他人自由的侵犯。惩罚不仅使人们有更多的自由，例如通过预防犯罪；它本身就构成了对相互自由的尊重。如果后一种说法是正确的，那么罪刑必然具有一定的意义这使他们无论后果如何都否认/肯定自由。我的目的是表明犯罪/惩罚与自由之间存在这种内在联系。我通过解释犯罪和惩罚的“自然意义”来做到这一点。这种处理该主题的方式受到了 Jean Hampton 使用 HP Grice 的自然意义概念的启发。扩展汉普顿的理论，借鉴哈特和康德，我认为犯罪具有否定自由的自然含义，而惩罚具有肯定自由的自然含义。这篇论文提出了一个理想的理论，而不是为实际的刑事司法实践辩护，不幸的是，在大多数国家，这种实践未能体现相互自由的价值。