Keltria
01-30-2005, 01:18 PM
No decision on future of minimum jail term
January 30 2005 at 03:43PM
By Chiara Carter
Despite calls to scrap mandatory minimum sentencing, the government still has to make up its mind whether it should extend or get rid of the law that ensures some categories of criminal are locked up for set periods.
Minimum sentencing has been enforced since mid-1998 and provides sentences of five, seven, 10, 15, 20, 25 years and life for offences that include theft, drug dealing, corruption, aggravated assault, rape and murder.
By the end of April, government and parliament have to decide whether to renew the provisions, which are unpopular with most judges and magistrates, and have been sharply criticised by the Inspecting Judge of Prisons, Hannes Fagan.
This weekend, the Democratic Alliance indicated it too supported dropping minimum sentences for some categories of criminals.
This weekend, deputy-minister of justice Johnny de Lange said the issue was still under scrutiny and government had yet to decide what path of action it would recommend. He refused to comment on speculation that government might be considering changing some aspects of mandatory sentencing.
Writing in the most recent edition of the SA Crime Quarterly, Fagan argues the case for minimum-sentence legislation to be scrapped, not extended, when it expires at the end of April - not least because he says this law, coupled with stringent parole rules, has led to gross overcrowding at prisons.
Fagan is not alone in his views. Correctional Services officials are keen to see moves to reduce the prison population.
Judges and magistrates have expressed concern that minimum sentence requirements mean they cannot take mitigating factors into account and have to treat all those guilty of a particular type of crime in the same way irrespective of differing circumstances.
Democratic Alliance spokesperson on justice Sheila Camerer said on Saturday that not only did mandatory minimum sentencing add to the problem of overcrowding at prisons, but it also clogged the justice system because cases had to be reviewed by another court.
"I know there is not a judge who favours the minimum sentence legislation - it is possible we (legislators) went too far, but in cases of brutal rapes as well as of murder, minimum sentences should stay."
The Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1997 came into force in mid 1998 and was subsequently extended to apply until April 30 this year.
The minimum sentences were intended to be emergency measures responding to spiralling crime and public concern about criminality, concern that along with crime statistics has abated somewhat since that time.
January 30 2005 at 03:43PM
By Chiara Carter
Despite calls to scrap mandatory minimum sentencing, the government still has to make up its mind whether it should extend or get rid of the law that ensures some categories of criminal are locked up for set periods.
Minimum sentencing has been enforced since mid-1998 and provides sentences of five, seven, 10, 15, 20, 25 years and life for offences that include theft, drug dealing, corruption, aggravated assault, rape and murder.
By the end of April, government and parliament have to decide whether to renew the provisions, which are unpopular with most judges and magistrates, and have been sharply criticised by the Inspecting Judge of Prisons, Hannes Fagan.
This weekend, the Democratic Alliance indicated it too supported dropping minimum sentences for some categories of criminals.
This weekend, deputy-minister of justice Johnny de Lange said the issue was still under scrutiny and government had yet to decide what path of action it would recommend. He refused to comment on speculation that government might be considering changing some aspects of mandatory sentencing.
Writing in the most recent edition of the SA Crime Quarterly, Fagan argues the case for minimum-sentence legislation to be scrapped, not extended, when it expires at the end of April - not least because he says this law, coupled with stringent parole rules, has led to gross overcrowding at prisons.
Fagan is not alone in his views. Correctional Services officials are keen to see moves to reduce the prison population.
Judges and magistrates have expressed concern that minimum sentence requirements mean they cannot take mitigating factors into account and have to treat all those guilty of a particular type of crime in the same way irrespective of differing circumstances.
Democratic Alliance spokesperson on justice Sheila Camerer said on Saturday that not only did mandatory minimum sentencing add to the problem of overcrowding at prisons, but it also clogged the justice system because cases had to be reviewed by another court.
"I know there is not a judge who favours the minimum sentence legislation - it is possible we (legislators) went too far, but in cases of brutal rapes as well as of murder, minimum sentences should stay."
The Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1997 came into force in mid 1998 and was subsequently extended to apply until April 30 this year.
The minimum sentences were intended to be emergency measures responding to spiralling crime and public concern about criminality, concern that along with crime statistics has abated somewhat since that time.