Retributive justice is a theory of justice which holds that the best response to a crime is a suitablepunishment, inflicted for its own sake. The goal only goal in retributive justice is punishment. Preventing future crimes (deterrence) or rehabilitation of the offender are not important in determining punishments. Retributivists hold that when an offender breaks the law, justice requires that the criminal suffer in return. They maintain that retribution is different from revenge, because retributive justice is only directed at wrongs, has inherent limits, is not personal, involves no pleasure at the suffering of others, and employs procedural standards.
De Legibus, 106 BC; see also Ronen Perry,
The concept is found in most cultures around the world and in many ancient texts. The presence of retributive justice in the ancient Jewish culture is shown by its inclusion in the law of Moses, specifically in Deuteronomy 19:17-21, and Exodus 21:23-21:27, which includes the punishments of "life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot". Very similar phrasing is found in the Code of Hammurabi. Many other documents demonstrate similar values in other cultures. However, the judgment of whether a punishment is appropriately severe can vary greatly between cultures and individuals.
Proportionality requires that the level of punishment be related to the severity of the offending behaviour. An accurate reading of the biblical phrase "an eye for an eye" in Exodus and Leviticus is said to be: 'only one eye for one eye', or "an eye in place of an eye". However, this does not mean that the punishment has to be equivalent to the crime. A retributive system must punish severe crimes more harshly than minor crimes, but retributivists differ about how harsh or soft the system should be overall. The crime's level of severity can also be determined in different ways. Severity can be determined by the amount of harm, unfair advantage or the moral imbalance the crime caused.