Report on Mandatory Sentences - Law Reform Commission

1
CHAPTER 1
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR CRIMINAL SANCTIONS AND
SENTENCING
A
Introduction
1.01 In this chapter, the Commission outlines a conceptual framework within which current Irish
mandatory sentencing regimes may be analysed. It suggests that these regimes may be evaluated by
reference to three key concepts: 1) the purpose of the criminal justice system; 2) the specific aims of
criminal sanctions; and 3) the fundamental principles of justice. In Part B, the Commission begins by
providing an overview of the general aims of the criminal justice system. It identifies the reduction of
crime as the overarching aim of the justice system. It notes that each of the component parts of this
system, including the sentencing process, contributes to this aim. In this Part, the Commission observes
that the sentencing process may have different attributes (discussed in the next Part), each of which
seeks to facilitate crime-reduction. It proceeds to discuss the Court of Criminal Appeal decision in The
People (Attorney General) v Poyning 1 which illustrates how these attributes may feature in the sentencing
process.
1.02 In Part C, the Commission discusses in detail the following aims of the criminal justice system:
deterrence, punishment, reformation and rehabilitation, reparation and incapacitation. It notes that while
crime-reduction (the core purpose of the justice system) is a constant concern, the specific aims of
criminal sanctions may be differently prioritised in individual cases. This Part outlines what each of these
aims entails and notes that the extent to which mandatory sentencing regimes further these goals
requires consideration.
1.03 In Part D, the Commission discusses the key principles of sentencing, namely that: (a) there
should be a consistent approach to sentencing so that like cases should be treated alike, and (b) the
criminal sanction should be proportionate to the circumstances of the particular offence and the particular
offender. This Part identifies as another key matter that requires consideration, the extent to which
mandatory sentencing regimes comply with these principles.
1.04 In Part E, the Commission notes that while the Supreme Court and the Court of Criminal Appeal
have sought to increase consistency and proportionality in sentencing, commentators and surveys of
sentencing practice call into question whether the aims and principles discussed in Parts C and D are
being realised. The Commission discusses proposals to develop a more structured sentencing system in
order to address this, including the development of sentencing guidance or guidelines under the auspices
of a proposed Judicial Council. The discussion in this chapter thus provides the conceptual framework
against which the Commission examines the mandatory and presumptive sentencing regimes that are
analysed in Chapters 3 to 5 of the <strong>Report</strong>. The Commission concludes the chapter by outlining the
relevance of the discussed aims and principles to the analysis contained in the remaining chapters.
B
Overview of the Aims of the Criminal Justice System and Principles of Sentencing
1.05 A key aim of the criminal justice system is to reduce crime, that is, prohibited and unwanted
conduct that is detrimental or harmful to society. 2 The criminal justice system comprises several
1
2
[1972] IR 402.
The Commission acknowledges that there are many other factors at play in terms of the causes of criminal
activity in society, and that the criminal justice system is merely one aspect of how society, including the State,
attempts to reduce such activity. These include other policy-related matters such as general economic policy,
education policy and employment policy. This <strong>Report</strong> is confined primarily to a discussion of the role of the
criminal justice system. The Commission discusses at paragraph 4.199ff, below, the research of the Health
5