View/Open - CORA - University College Cork

from an assumed jurisdiction of the sentencing courts may not comport with the classical
manifestation of the sanction as it emerged in other jurisdictions. Does the mere presence
of such a sentencing tool promote the liberal use of the suspended sentence? Do
sentencing courts always intend to apply a custodial sentence before suspending it or are
such courts merely utilising the coercive features of the sanction without ever intending to
sendthe convictedoffender into custody?
Regrettably, very little is known about the use of these two sanctions in Irish sentencing
practice. A substantial bodyof literature exists on the lawrelating to the communityservice
order and the suspended sentence in Ireland but the operation of these sanctions as
decarcerative instruments remains obscure. It may be that a substantial number of
offenders are diverted from custodial sentences bythe use of these sanctions bythe courts.
If this be so, then the sanctions may be deemed to serve the purpose for which they were
designed. But if the sanctions are deployed as a via media by the courts as alternatives to
other alternatives such as fines, probation and conditional discharges, significant
displacement of penalties may be seen to emerge. Simultaneously, the offender who is
given a community service order or a suspended sentence without reference to a custodial
sentence may be placed in a higher category of risk of receiving a custodial sentence in the
event of breach of either sanction.
This thesis proceeds to examine the emergence of these two sanctions to discern their
rationales and to set out the contexts from which they emerged. However, an exhaustive
study of the literature, legislation, case lawand political debates on the sanctions may only
advance the enquiry to a certain point. Any further understanding of the issues may only
emerge when the cognitions and expectations of the primary actors in the sentencing
function namely the judges, are taken into account. Do the judges maintain complete
fidelity to the decarcerative policy of the community service order and the suspended
sentence? If so, might one conclude that their appetite for the custodial sentence is indeed
great when the numbers of community service orders and suspended sentences are added
to the sum of custodial sentences? Alternatively, are the judges or some of the judges
engaging in organic practices and experimentation when they utilise these sanctions in
some different manner and for a different purpose? If this is so, what do the judges believe
is the function of either sanction? What do the judges believe they are doing and what do
theyexpect to achieve bystructuringthe sentences as non-custodial sentences?
2