Proportionality in the criminal law: The differing american versus canadian approaches to punishment
The focus of this Article shall be upon the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution and s. 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, both of which prohibit “cruel and unusual punishment”; and their effect on mandatory criminal sentencing (via penal statute) in the two countries. Part I of this Article shall briefly explain the differences between the jurisdictional application of criminal justice in the United States and Canada. Part II of this Article shall present and explain the American Eighth Amendment approach to the constitutionality of mandatory criminal sentencing. Part III of this Article shall present and explain the Canadian s. 12 approach to the constitutionality of mandatory criminal sentencing. Part IV of this Article shall compare and contrast the two national approaches and present the underlying argument of this Article, namely that if one’s concern is the fair and proportionate application of justice, then the Canadian approach to reconciling the constitutional prohibition against “cruel and unusual punishment” and the application (through penal statute) of mandatory criminal sentencing is the superior one. Part V of this Article shall explore the possible reasons for the differing national approaches to mandatory criminal sentencing.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Revenge, Victim's Rights, and Criminal Justice.Michael Davis - 2000 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 14 (1):119-128.
Punishment, Responsibility, and Justice: A Relational Critique.Alan W. Norrie - 2000 - Oxford University Press.
Criminal Justice in a Democracy: Towards a Relational Conception of Criminal Law and Punishment. [REVIEW]René Foqué - 2008 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 2 (3):207-227.
Why Should Remorse Be a Mitigating Factor in Sentencing?Steven Keith Tudor - 2008 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 2 (3):241-257.
The Practice of Punishment: Towards a Theory of Restorative Justice.Wesley Cragg - 1992 - Routledge.
Changing the Criminal Character: Nanotechnology and Criminal Punishment.Katrina Sifferd - 2012 - In A. Santosuosso (ed.), Proceedings of the 2011 Law and Science Young Scholars Symposium. Pavia University Press.
Sentencing: Must Justice Be Even-Handed? [REVIEW]Michael Davis - 1982 - Law and Philosophy 1 (1):77 - 117.
Proportionality in Sentencing and the Restorative Justice Paradigm: 'Just Deserts' for Victims and Defendants Alike? [REVIEW]Tyrone Kirchengast - 2010 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 4 (2):197-213.
Added to index2009-05-07
Total downloads16 ( #296,417 of 2,164,556 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #188,391 of 2,164,556 )
How can I increase my downloads?