Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 16 December 2004
192 Mr. J. O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on the issue of, and level of, inconsistency in sentencing in the District Court; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34058/04]
View answerThe traditional approach to sentencing is for the Oireachtas to lay down by law the maximum penalty appropriate to a particular offence and for the courts, having considered all the circumstances of a case, to impose an appropriate penalty up to that maximum. This approach reflects the doctrine of the separation of powers. The courts are, subject only to the Constitution and the law, independent in the exercise of their judicial functions. The Legislature lays down the possible punishment range but it is for the courts to exercise discretion in deciding the punishment while taking account of all the circumstances of the case and of the offender. The District Court has a reasonably wide range of sentencing options at its disposal including fines, probation orders, community service orders, compensation orders and imprisonment. In light of the geographical organisation of the District Court, it is not unusual that some variation will occur in relation to the penalties imposed for similar offences.
The Courts and Court Officers Act 1995 enables me, as Minister, to provide funds for judicial training courses arranged by the Judiciary and, in this regard, funds are made available to the judicial studies institute which was established by the Chief Justice for the purposes of judicial training. I understand that the issue of sentencing has been examined by the institute in the context of its training programme. As regards consistency in sentencing, section 36 of the Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act 1961 makes provision for meetings of District Court judges to discuss, inter alia, the avoidance of undue divergence in the exercise of the jurisdiction of the court and the general level of fines and penalties. The complex question of sentencing policy was addressed at length by the Law Reform Commission in its report on sentencing which specifically recommended against the introduction of statutory sentencing guidelines. The report pointed out a number of differences of opinion among members of the commission in relation to some of the recommendations which tends to underline the obvious complexities which arise in relation to sentencing policy.
I note the recommendation made by the commission against the introduction of statutory sentencing guidelines. Statutory guidelines would involve, the argument goes, an undue interference in the independence of the Judiciary. The decision on what kind of sentence to impose is a judicial determination and, save only in exceptional circumstances, such as murder, major drug trafficking and certain firearm and explosives offences, the Oireachtas should generally be cautious in prescribing minimum sentences.
Action has been taken on a number of recommendations contained in the commission's report. For example, the Criminal Law Act 1997 abolished the penalties of penal servitude and imprisonment with hard labour. The issue of sentencing, in general, was addressed in the recent report of the working group on the jurisdiction of the courts. The group, while it did not make final recommendations, drew attention to possible options to promote consistency of sentencing which are being considered in my Department in consultation with the Courts Service. I would also advise the Deputy that in the context of the Criminal Justice Bill I am considering further reform in relation to structured sentencing.
Finally, I believe that the courts are in the best position to see just what is the proper sentence as they alone can take all the circumstances in a particular case into account.
193 Mr. J. O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the proposals he has to address the issue of, and level of, inconsistency in sentencing in the District Court; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34059/04]
View answerThe traditional approach to sentencing is for the Oireachtas to lay down by law the maximum penalty appropriate to a particular offence and for the courts, having considered all the circumstances of a case, to impose an appropriate penalty up to that maximum. This approach reflects the doctrine of the separation of powers. The courts are, subject only to the Constitution and the law, independent in the exercise of their judicial functions. The Legislature lays down the possible punishment range but it is for the courts to exercise discretion in deciding the punishment while taking account of all the circumstances of the case and of the offender. The District Court has a reasonably wide range of sentencing options at its disposal including fines, probation orders, community service orders, compensation orders and imprisonment. In light of the geographical organisation of the District Court, it is not unusual that some variation will occur in relation to the penalties imposed for similar offences.
The Courts and Court Officers Act 1995 enables me, as Minister, to provide funds for judicial training courses arranged by the Judiciary and, in this regard, funds are made available to the judicial studies institute which was established by the Chief Justice for the purposes of judicial training. I understand that the issue of sentencing has been examined by the institute in the context of its training programme. As regards consistency in sentencing, section 36 of the Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act, 1961 makes provision for meetings of District Court judges to discuss, inter alia, the avoidance of undue divergence in the exercise of the jurisdiction of the court and the general level of fines and penalties. The complex question of sentencing policy was addressed at length by the Law Reform Commission in its report on sentencing which specifically recommended against the introduction of statutory sentencing guidelines. The report pointed out a number of differences of opinion among members of the commission in relation to some of the recommendations which tends to underline the obvious complexities which arise in relation to sentencing policy.
I note the recommendation made by the commission against the introduction of statutory sentencing guidelines. Statutory guidelines would involve, the argument goes, an undue interference in the independence of the Judiciary. The decision on what kind of sentence to impose is a judicial determination and, save only in exceptional circumstances, such as murder, major drug trafficking and certain firearm and explosives offences, the Oireachtas should generally be cautious in prescribing minimum sentences.
Action has been taken on a number of recommendations contained in the commission's report. For example, the Criminal Law Act 1997 abolished the penalties of penal servitude and imprisonment with hard labour. The issue of sentencing, in general, was addressed in the recent report of the working group on the jurisdiction of the courts. The group, while it did not make final recommendations, drew attention to possible options to promote consistency of sentencing which are being considered in my Department in consultation with the Courts Service. I would also advise the Deputy that in the context of the Criminal Justice Bill I am considering further reform in relation to structured sentencing.
Finally, I believe that the courts are in the best position to see just what is the proper sentence as they alone can take all the circumstances in a particular case into account.
