Sunday, March 29, 2009

One for one 

Ending two-for-one sentencing credit may be controversial but anything that attempts to remove artificial distortions from the justice system is likely a good thing.
One of the rationales for "crediting" convicted prisoners with more time from their remand time is that people in remand centres have no access to rehablitation, counselling or recreation programs. So, the solution to that is to provide remand centres with rehabilitation, counselling and recreation programs. Another rationale is that prisons will be more crowded if sentences are longer. So, I guess we'll have to build more prisons. The stupidest reason I've heard for not passing this law is that it removes judicial discretion. Huh? The two-for-one sentencing credit wasn't discretionary either. And don't most of our laws already specify a particular sentencing range for a particular crime? But the best reason for removing the credit is that apparently lawyers were starting to use it as an excuse to delay trials and game the system. So, all in all, the credit has to go.

Recommend this Post at Progressive Bloggers | 0 comments


Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Email me!