ASSESSING THE IMPACT: Mandatory and minimum sentences in South Africa

Julia Sloth-Nielsen,Louise Ehlers

doi:10.17159/2413-3108/2005/v0i14a1005

Abstract

The legislation passed in 1997 that provides for mandatory minimum sentences for serious crimes was recently extended for another two years. At the time, the aim was to reduce serious and violent crime, achieve consistency in sentencing, and satisfy the public that sentences were sufficiently severe. This article argues that the legislation has achieved little or no significant impact with regard to these goals. Instead, many agree that the provisions have exacerbated the problem of overcrowding in South African prisons.

Highlights

Minimum sentencing was introduced into law in 1997 by the Criminal Law Amendment Act
The following key questions are examined in this article: Are mandatory minimum sentences constitutional? Have they deterred or prevented crime? Do they afford better protection to victims? What is the relationship between minimum sentences and prison overcrowding? the article questions whether South Africa needs a more comprehensive sentencing reform strategy
The impact of minimum sentencing is difficult to quantify, the information presented in this article suggests that there has been little or no significant impact with regard to any of the above goals

Summary

Mandatory and minimum sentences in South Africa

The legislation passed in 1997 that provides for mandatory minimum sentences for serious crimes was recently extended for another two years. The Consortium noted that the above issues were precisely those that in earlier arguments had been put forward as factors that the courts should not take into account in determining substantial and compelling circumstances With this in mind the Consortium put forward the following suggestion as one optional reform proposal: Commentators have drawn attention to the poor drafting of the Act, and the difficulties this has caused the courts as they have had to delve into the details of the offence types set out in Schedule 2.32 Problems were encountered in the application of the legislation to district courts, as the law makes mention only of regional courts and high courts. This has since increased to 49,094 (36%) (Figures 2 and 3)

Average for each year

Findings

Conclusion