vea-avp-eng

A VALUES AND EVIDENCE APPROACH TO SENTENCING PURPOSES AND PRINCIPLES

Author Introduction

• Author: Anthony N. Doob

• Affiliation: Centre for Criminology & Sociolegal Studies, University of Toronto

• Published: Department of Justice Canada, October 2016

Key Statements

• Sentencing reflects societal values and principles.

• Discussion on the evolution and current status of Canadian sentencing practices.

Page 1: Overview of Content

• Introduction of the values reflected in Canada’s sentencing policies.

• Importance of understanding historical context for contemporary values and principles.

Page 2: Reproduction Permissions

• Information can be reproduced for non-commercial purposes with proper attribution.

• Mandatory minimal guidelines on the reproduction and distribution of materials.

Page 3: Contents Overview

• Key Sections:

  • Canadian values on sentencing

  • Historical changes (Harper Decade)

  • Central purpose and other purposes of sentencing

  • Proportionality and restraint in imprisonment

  • Mandatory minimum sentences and their implications

  • Factors influencing sentencing

  • Sentencing of organizations

  • Summary and conclusions

Page 4: Overview of Sentencing Principles

Sentencing as Reflection of Societal Values

• Nature of Sentences: Punishments reflect societal values.

• Historical context: End of corporal and capital punishment in Canada (last execution in 1962).

• Importance of aligning current sanctions with contemporary Canadian values.

Canadian Values on Sentencing

• Until 1996, the Criminal Code lacked clear sentencing guidance.

• Majority discretion in sentencing was evident; foundational changes introduced later.

Page 5: The Harper Decade

Changes in Sentencing Philosophy

• Sentencing reforms initiated during Harper's tenure were seen as revolutionary.

• Controversy around hate-motivated crimes, specifically regarding sexual orientation.

• Public Reaction: The introduction of stricter sentencing guidelines prompted debates on values.

Page 6: Reception of Sentencing Policies

Government Policy Statements

• Previous government policy statements (1982) emphasized restraint in the criminal justice system.

• Lack of media attention on policy due to its perceived generally accepted nature.

Page 7: Continuing Themes in Sentencing Discourse

Recognition of Restraint Principles

• Principles emphasized were proportionality and accountability of offenders.

• Previous governments recognized the necessity of focusing on rehabilitation rather than retribution.

Page 8: Consensus on Sentencing Practices

Ministerial Endorsement

• Recognition from various political parties illustrated a growing consensus on restraint in sentencing.

• Minister of Justice quotes from past policies reinforcing current commitments to proportionality.

Page 9: Counteracting Punitiveness

The Effect of Political Rhetoric

• Examination of whether harsher legislative policies translated to public opinion shifts.

• Public support for mandatory minimums, agency to have flexible sentencing, and judicial discretion.

Page 10: Public Perception and Research Data

Survey data from Canadians

• Trends indicated no significant move towards increased punitiveness from 1993 to 2009.

• Shifts in how Canadians evaluate sentencing severity and its effectiveness.

Page 11: The Role of Jurors

Juror Sentencing Preferences

• Results depict jurors often recommended lighter sentences than imposed by judges despite negative perceptions of leniency in courts.

Page 12: Formalized Purposes of Sentencing

• Highlighting essential purposes outlined in various documents (Criminal Code, Youth Criminal Justice Act).

• Importance of reforming statements detailing the purposes of sentencing to ensure alignment with societal values and needs.

Page 13: Understanding Accountability

Recommendations on Sentencing Philosophy

• Modernization of the Criminal Code to emphasize accountability and proportionality.

• Proportionate sentences should reflect the offender's responsibility.

Page 14: Additional Sentencing Goals

Other Functions of Sentencing

• Sentencing also serves to provide reparative justice and facilitate rehabilitation.

• Judges encouraged to explore options reducing harm to victims and communities.

Page 15: Reinforcing Proportionality

Need for Proportional Sentencing

• Emphasis on the long-standing cultural value of proportionality in sentencing in Canada.

Page 16: Addressing Mandatory Minimums

Historical Context on Mandatory Sentencing

• Criticisms against mandatory minimums based on their ineffectiveness and problematic implementation.

• Services required to re-evaluate existing mandatory sentence policies.

Page 17: Considerations for Sentencing Equity

Interplay of Sentencing Requirements

• Exploring issues surrounding mandatory consecutive sentencing and the impact on overall sentence length.

Page 18: Organizational Sentencing

Sentencing Framework for Organizations

• Need for guidance and support for judges when sentencing organizations.

Page 19: Reflections on Canadian Sentencing Values

Summary of Established Principles

• Consensus choices around accountability, deterrence, and public protection.

• Historical perspectives affirming steadfast values in Canadian sentencing practices.

Page 20: Recommendations for Future Changes

Suggested Reforms

• Emphasizing values around justice and respect for law without overemphasis on harshness as control methods.

Appendix 1: Quiz on Criminal Justice Policy

• Engages readers in thinking critically about the evolution and perspectives on justice policy in Canada.

Appendix 2: Examples of Sentencing Purposes

• Clear illustrations of statutory purposes behind sentencing, articulating societal aims of umpunishment and rehabilitation.

Appendix 3: Principles of Sentencing

• Definitions by the Canadian Sentencing Commission to provide comprehensive guidance on imposing sentences.

Appendix 4: Imprisonment Rates in Canada

• Statistical overview of Canada's historical imprisonment rates from 1951 to 2014, offering insights into overall trends.