NCJ Number
143488
Date Published
1982
Length
200 pages
Annotation
If substantive reform of Canada's Criminal Code is to be effective, government officials must adopt a broad definition of sentencing.
Abstract
Since the last major reform of the Criminal Code in 1892, terms of various Royal Commissions have tended to be narrow, resulting in piecemeal changes since that date. The current sentencing system is only partially one of fixed sentences. Amending legislation has resulted in the availability of numerous sentencing options. A review of sentencing structure and criteria in Canada indicates that diversion is likely to increase the exercise of discretion and that probation and restitution are not likely to be used more frequently in the absence of major changes to the structure of sentencing. Guidelines and other sentencing reforms may not be effective in reducing disparity in sentencing unless they take into consideration prosecutorial discretion and plea bargaining, parole, value differences in different jurisdictions, the provision of explicit criteria for nonincarcerative sentencing, the appropriate length of incarcerative sentences, means for differentiating offenders according to offense, and the need for flexibility in dealing with "hard" cases. Footnotes and tables