Discretion in Sentencing

Discretion in Sentencing

Discretion in Sentencing - Text version

Discretion in Sentencing

This infographic presents data collected via the National Justice Survey (2016 and 2017) which explored discretion in sentencing (NJS 2016=1,863; NJS 2017=2019).

A pie chart that displays 96% with a description to the right that says: 96% believe that judges should have discretion to determine a just sentence.

A pie chart that displays 4% with a description to the right that says: 4% say that it is fair to give everyone convicted of the same offence the same sentence (regardless of mitigating circumstances).

Judges should have greater discretion to consider using conditional sentence (e.g. house arrest) when there is a low risk to public safety (82%).

A horizontal bar chart representing factors that are important to consider when sentencing. The x axis lists the categories of some factors important to consider in sentencing from left to right: Seriousness of the offence (95%), Personal circumstances of the offender (81%), Impact on the offender’s children (72%) and Responsibility of the offender (72%). The y axis measures from 0 – 100.

Date modified: