‘Lottery’ jail terms - Judges must explain their decisions

PUBLIC trust in the administration of justice in this country has been shaken by the inconsistency of sentencing by the courts.

From the forthright comments of James Hamilton, Director of Public Prosecutions, it is clear that judges need to espouse a new system that would require them to explain the reasons behind their sentencing decisions.

So unsatisfactory is the present scenario that he compared it to a “lottery”.

While the independence of the judiciary must be protected, this is not necessarily the primary concern at a time when violent crime is rampant in communities where drugs are rife and the gun is king.

The average citizen is more concerned about his or her personal security than about copper-fastening an abstract concept of judicial independence.

There is an onus on the judiciary to operate on a basis of self-regulation. Arguably, that is the best means of safeguarding judicial independence.