A Just Measure of Pain? Sentencing and Sentencing Reform in the Era of the Charter

GARETH MORLEY

ABSTRACT

The debate over the legitimacy of judicial review under the Charter rages between those who see the Charter as a means to vindicate rule-of-law and equality values and those who worry about giving power to an unaccountable judiciary. The law and practice of criminal sentencing provides a case study for evaluating these competing perspectives. In 1982, the determination of sentencing quantum was left to the discretion of judges. Despite or because of this, sentencing was arbitrary, and contributed to social inequality. During the Charter era, the Supreme Court has intervened to protect the discretion of trial judges, but not to make the system any fairer. The author argues that Bill C-41, an attempt at legislative reform of sentencing, is inadequate, and that part of the reason may be worries about the implications of the Charter.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Citation: (1997) 55(2) U.T. Fac. L. Rev. 269.
Copyright © 1997. University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review.
All rights reserved.