Criminological Analysis of Economic Crimes in Light of the Theory of Neutralization Techniques

Abstract

Economic crimes are among those offenses that, even in their simplest forms, challenge economic systems and, in the long run, hinder effective governance. Perpetrators of such crimes often possess distinctive characteristics such as exceptional intelligence, ingenuity, and astuteness. These traits, combined with the inherent complexities of economic crimes—such as their sophisticated nature, the lack of immediate tangible consequences, and the absence of a clearly identifiable victim—have rendered them a significant international concern. Given their characteristics, offenders may present various justifications during the commission of the crime, in their defense, or even post-trial. This study examines the criminological aspects of economic crimes through the lens of the Neutralization Techniques Theory, introduced by David Matza and Gresham Sykes in the 1960s. According to this theory, offenders acknowledge engaging in criminal and deviant behavior; however, they employ various justifications to rationalize their actions. These techniques include denial of responsibility, denial of injury, denial of the victim, condemnation of the condemners, and appeal to higher loyalties—collectively known as neutralization techniques. While these techniques are not exhaustive, they can be expanded upon based on their fundamental principles. Furthermore, considering the characteristics of both offenders and economic crimes, it appears that these techniques can extend to the outright denial of the crime itself. Nevertheless, applying this theory to the analysis of economic crimes presents certain challenges, including difficulties in determining the exact timing of neutralization strategies, the neglect of external contributing factors, and a lack of comprehensive applicability. Using a descriptive-analytical approach and library-based data collection, this study aims to explore these aspects in greater depth.