|
UNDULY LENIENT SENTENCES
In February 2004, a TAR member questioned Harriet Harman, then Solicitor General, on the Sexual Offences Act and its potential impact on improving justice for women. One of the key problems under existing legislation has been the inappropriate sentencing made by judges in rape cases.
Ms Harman shared this concern. She also shared with TAR the details of 16 cases, since 2001, that received unduly lenient sentences and which her office succeeded in having increased. She wants all examples of lenient sentencing sent to her. Under the ‘Unduly lenient Sentences’ procedure, she has the power to re-assess such cases. Referrals have to be made within 28 days of the sentence being imposed but anyone can refer the case and there is no danger that the sentence will be reviewed and reduced – only that it will be reviewed and, if appropriate, increased. This could prove to be a strong campaigning tool.
The Solicitor General is now Mike O'Brien who was appointed
as Solicitor General on 9 May 2005, having formerly been Minister of State for
Energy and E-Commerce at the Department of Trade and Industry. Contact details for the Secretary General are given below and the whole process is detailed – so come on, lets start referring cases!
Contact details for Mike O'Brien Solicitor General
Address:
Legal Secretariat to the Law Officers
Attorney-General’s Chambers
9 Buckingham Gate
London
SW1E 6JP
Further Details:
Full details available on the 'They
work for you' website
Telephone numbers:
House of Commons Phone number: 020
7219 6464
Powers
The Attorney General, with the leave of the Court of Appeal, has powers under sections 35 and 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, to refer to the Court sentences which appear to be unduly lenient. This must be done within 28 days of the sentence being imposed. The time limit is mandatory and cannot be extended.
The offences that are referable include rape, certain sexual offences involving children and pornography involving children.
Procedure
The CPS has arrangements in place for considering cases where a sentence may be unduly lenient.
A lawyer from the original CPS branch first considers sentences. If the branch considers that a sentence is not unduly lenient, that is the end of the matter. If the branch considers that the sentence could be unduly lenient, it refers the papers to CPS Casework Directorate where a different lawyer reviews them.
The Casework Directorate lawyer has to decide if the sentence can be said to fall outside the range of sentences which the Judge could reasonably consider appropriate, taking into account all relevant factors and sentencing guidelines given by the Court of Appeal. If the lawyer decides that the sentence does not fall into that category, that is the end of the matter.
If the lawyer takes the view that the sentence may be unduly lenient, the papers are sent to Treasury Counsel for advice. Once the CPS receives Treasury’s Counsel’s advice, it is for the Casework Directorate lawyer to decide whether or not to refer the case to the Attorney General for consideration.
Victims’ Rights
Victims, their families, and members of the public sometimes complain to the CPS branch, which may refer the sentence to the Attorney if the above tests are met. Cases may also come to the Attorney’s attention through complaints by a Member of Parliament, or members of the public may write to the Attorney themselves.
Court of Appeal
Where the Attorney General refers the sentence to the Court of Appeal for review, the Court decides whether to allow the appeal. If it does so decide, the case will be listed for hearing. On review, the Court may quash the sentence and replace it with one it considers more appropriate. However, it may only be one that the Crown Court could lawfully have passed. For example, it cannot increase a sentence to 15 years where the maximum is eight.
Examples
A defendant at Newcastle Crown Court was found guilty of two serious sexual assaults and was sentenced to five years. The CPS referred the case to the Attorney, who referred it to the Court of Appeal. The sentence was increased to eight years.
| 
