Sentencing: from vagueness to arbitrariness - the need to abolish the stain that is the instinctive synthesis
Version 2 2024-06-17, 13:18Version 2 2024-06-17, 13:18
Version 1 2015-03-12, 14:10Version 1 2015-03-12, 14:10
journal contribution
posted on 2024-06-17, 13:18authored byM Bagaric
Criminal sanctions involve the deliberate infliction of hardship on offenders. In sentencing, the state acts in its most coercive and decisive manner: ‘the state may use its most awesome power: the power to use force against its citizens and others’. Despite the importance of the interests at stake in the sentencing realm,
sentencing is arguably the least coherent, predictable and principled area of law. The High Court of Australia has not facilitated attempts to inject clarity and precision into sentencing determinations. It has repeatedly endorsed the ‘instinctive synthesis’ approach to sentencing, emphasising the need for
‘individual justice’ over the need for transparency and a step-wise systematic approach to sentencing.
History
Journal
University of New South Wales law journal
Volume
38
Pagination
72-109
Location
Sydney, N.S.W.
ISSN
0313-0096
eISSN
1839-2881
Language
eng
Publication classification
C Journal article, C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal