Making sentencing fair

This week I will be hosting an adjournment debate in the House of Commons on Unduly Lenient Sentences. During the last Parliamentary term I introduced a Private Members Bill on this topic. Unfortunately the Bill was unable to secure a second reading but I was delighted to ensure that the Conservative manifesto contained a commitment on this issue.

Under current UK criminal procedure, defence teams can appeal any sentence that they feel has been too tough. This ability is automatic against sentences given at the Magistrates Court or Youth Court or through leave of a Judge against Crown Court sentences. Conversely the prosecution cannot appeal at all against unduly lenient sentences where they are imposed in the Magistrates Court or Youth Court and only for a handful of offences when sentencing takes place in the Crown Court. For example, many sexual offences, most serious assaults and public order matters, burglary and dangerous driving cannot currently be subject to a prosecution appeal, even where it is clear the sentence was too lenient. In short, the system currently favours the criminal over the victim of crime. It allows the Courts to be as lenient as they like without redress, yet subject to appeal if they are robust.

It is something of a cliché but the scales of justice should balance, the criminal justice system is based on the principle that there should be equal treatment for both the prosecution and defence where possible.

Under the Unduly Lenient Sentence System a victim, prosecutor, MP or member of the public can ask the Attorney General to review a sentence given at a Crown Court. The Attorney General will decide if the sentence appears to be too lenient and in certain circumstances will refer the case to the Court of Appeal for reconsideration. This happened in the case of Stuart Hall who had his sentence doubled.

Conversely there are many reported cases where despite a request to review a sentence the Attorney General has been unable to do so. One such example was the abuse of an elderly lady with dementia in a care-home by those that were expected to care for her and a teacher convicted of having sexual intercourse with his 15 year old student. In these cases non-custodial sentences could not be appealed as the offences for which the sentences were given are  not within the scope of the scheme.

It is time this unfairness to the victim of crime is changed, we need a more balanced appeals system for our criminal courts and we now have the opportunity to achieve this.