Terence Flanagan (Dublin North East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

378. To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality his views regarding the level of inconsistency in the sentencing system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28929/13]

Terence Flanagan (Dublin North East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

379. To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality his views on whether a dedicated body should be established to publish sentencing guidance for judges in order to address the level of inconsistency in the system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28930/13]

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 378 and 379 together.

As the Deputy will no doubt appreciate, judges are independent in the matter of sentencing, as in other matters concerning the exercise of judicial functions, subject only to the Constitution and the law. In accordance with this principle, the role of the Oireachtas has been to specify in law a maximum penalty and a court, having considered all the circumstances of the case, to impose an appropriate penalty up to that maximum. The court is required to impose a sentence which is proportionate not only to the crime but to the individual offender, in that process identifying where on the sentencing range the particular case should lie and then applying any mitigating factors which may be present. An important safeguard rests in the power of the Director of Public Prosecutions to apply to the Court of Criminal Appeal to review a sentence she regards as unduly lenient.

The Superior Courts have developed a substantial body of case law setting out general principles of sentencing. Sentencing practice is also being developed by a steering committee of the judiciary which developed the Irish Sentencing Information System (ISIS) website, a pilot initiative designed to gather information about the range of sentences and other penalties that have been imposed for particular types of offences across court jurisdictions. ISIS is being developed as a valuable tool not only for members of the judiciary but also for lawyers, researchers and those concerned with the needs of victims and their families, and I very much welcomed the recent initiative led by the Judiciary through the Judicial Research Office in undertaking the detailed work of gathering and providing information via the website. The Deputy may be aware that the ISIS committee are providing information on sentencing in relation to specific issues and a number of seminars have also been held.

The Deputy may also be aware that I have established a Penal Policy Review Group to carry out this review which will examine all aspects of penal policy including prevention, sentencing policies, alternatives to custody, accommodation and regimes, support for reintegration and rehabilitation and the issue of female prisoners. I expect the Group to report later this year and I intend to publish that report. It would not be in keeping with the principles of judicial independence for the Executive to impose a Sentencing Council on the Judiciary and it will be noted that is not advocated by the Law Reform Commission in its Report on Mandatory Sentencing which was published last week. The report covers a number of complex issues and the recommendations contained in the report will be fully considered in my Department together with the report of the Penal Policy Review Group when it has been finalised.