David Cameron promised that looters would feel the full force of the law. Courts have
been sitting round the clock holding
defendants on remand and issuing stern sentences. This is causing disquiet in some circles. Lib Dem MPs complain that the government has overacted, incapable of resisting the temptation to take
draconian decisions without adequate scrutiny.
Tessa Munt told the Guardian that the government’s approach “smacks of headline grabbing by Conservatives, not calm, rational policy-making.” Lady Hamwee also told the paper that it would be a “great pity if what [the justice secretary] Ken Clarke has been doing – finding a better way of sentencing – was to be undone.” Much of this dissent is by-the-by, the stock-in-trade of agitation. But an unidentified Lib Dem minister has also informed the paper that the party is striving to frustrate the introduction of elected police commissioners, a key Tory objective protected under the coalition agreement. Together with Nick Clegg’s demi-inquiry, this is another indication that the Lib Dems are trying to use this situation to reassert themselves. The Tories, for their part, are unrepentant: people want these criminal to be punished
Politics aside, the government’s immediate concern is the sceptical reaction of certain lawyers and human rights activists. For example, two men who used Facebook to incite riots in Cheshire have been sent to prison for four years. Some campaigners say that the sentence is disproportionate, and others argue that it won’t deter crime. Policemen and politicians disagree, claiming that these were extraordinary events that merit special treatment; and it’s important to note that the judge in this case shared their view:
‘In my judgement the context in which the offences of the night of 9th August were committed takes them completely outside the usual context of criminality. For the purposes of these sentences, I have no doubt at all that the principal purpose is that the Courts should show that outbursts of criminal behaviour like this will be and must be met with sentences longer than they would be if the offences had been committed in isolation. For those reasons I consider that the Sentencing Guidelines for specific offences are of much less weight in the context of the current case, and can properly be departed from.’
Eminent QCs warn that convicted criminals should only feel the full force of the existing law, intimating that attempts to impose greater penalties are likely to be be resisted. Expensive court actions and embarrassing sentencing revisions could sully the good headlines that the government is enjoying presently.
Comments