It has long been assumed that criminal law and punishment were founded upon prohibitive grounds; that criminal laws and their ensuing punishments if broken were meant to prohibit or contain individuals. On the contrary, the author asserts that the relationship between criminal law and punishment is one that encourages citizens to “enjoy without restraints!” Drawing on Zizek’s notion of “obscene permissivity,” the argument is made that criminal law operates as a system marked by permission in the form of a command to “enjoy!” rather than as a system based on prohibitive rules. Good citizens are defined based on their obedience to the command. Individuals or institutions are criminalized when they fail to follow the command to “enjoy without restraints!” It is this failure to “enjoy without restraints!” that calls forth the need for punishment. Punishment is thus understood as the remedy invented to endorse the slogan, “enjoy without restraints!” This understanding of the relationship between criminal law and punishment allows for an analysis of the norms governing the contemporary understanding of citizenship. It is argued that prohibitions are of unknown origins and are in fact, not grounded on anything. Permissions, on the other hand, grant individuals the freedom to perform certain acts. The command to “enjoy without restraints!” imposes certain conditions on enjoyment; it is in the failure to meet these conditions that punishment arises. The author asserts that if criminal law is to be analyzed seriously, it is imperative that researchers identify the conditions that the command to “enjoy without restraints!” endorses and subject them to critical scrutiny. Notes, references