LEGAL RESTRICTIONS THAT force judges to hand down jail time to people convicted of a crime have been described as “inherently unjust” by one expert while an advocacy group has urged for them to be repealed.

‘Presumptive’ mandatory minimum sentences apply to certain crimes, including non-violent drug offences where the value of the substances seized is worth over €13,000. It requires those convicted to serve a pre-determined amount of time in prison.

This measure meant that a 26-year-old man, with no previous convictions, received a six-and-a-half-year jail term this week after he pleaded guilty to driving a van loaded with €4 million worth of cannabis.

Mr Justice Martin Nolan agreed that Jamie Smith, a fitness instructor from Dublin, was not likely to re-offend and heard he had agreed to drive a van as he was in a particularly difficult financial situation and did not have had any idea of the amount of drugs involved.

In a statement posted to Instagram before he was sentenced Smith said: “It’s a reality I’ve had to come to terms with a mistake I made that shifted the course of my life but if this past year and a half has taught me anything it’s that no mistake no matter how big has to define you.”

He said he had learnt from his mistakes, before thanking his family and friends for the support they had given him throughout the judicial process.

While judges have the discretion to shorten sentences for first-time offenders, legal sources said other convicted persons, accused of similar crimes, may receive a shorter or suspended sentence or a fine when a mandatory minimum sentence is not applied.

At the sentencing hearing in Dublin this week, Judge Nolan noted Smith’s immediate admittance of wrongdoing, his cooperation with gardaí and his guilty plea. He described Smith as “likeable” and reduced his sentence from the mandatory ten years.

Speaking to The Journal, Dr Ian Marder – a leading judicial reform expert at Maynooth University – said it was his belief that mandatory minimum sentences are “inherently unjust”.

“The evidence does not suggest that mandatory minimums deter or rehabilitate in ways that make offending less likely,” Marder said.

He added that there is some discretion given to judges setting the length of the sentence, given the legal interpretation of the term ‘presumptive’.

Experts say there is no evidence to support the need for mandatory minimum sentences as a deterrent. Alamy Alamy

A Department of Justice spokesperson said that a report, published last year, found that judges do decrease the length of sentences in “the vast majority of sentences”.

Mandatory minimum sentences are also opposed by the Irish Penal Reform Trust (IPRT), an advocacy group in favour of making reforms to the judicial system in Ireland. Executive Director Saoirse Brady said the sentences have “the potential for injustice”.

She echoed the remarks made by Marder, an associate professor in criminology at the School of Law and Criminology at Maynooth University, that there is no evidence to suggest that they act as a deterrent. 

‘Waste of money and human life’

Marder said the restriction prohibits judges from providing a lower sentence, where mitigating circumstances make it proportionate to do so.

“Imprisoning people who are no danger to society is a huge waste of money and human life.

“We need the government to take a strong position in favour of community justice.”

The professor suggested that community justice, such as restorative justice practices, therapy and volunteer work for non-violent offenders, can be assisted with legislation that remove harmful sentences.

The Law Reform Commission has also called for all minimum sentences to be scrapped for over a decade.

A separate report, commissioned by the Department of Justice, also recommended a number of reforms to certain restrictions that are placed on those those serving mandatory minimum sentences last year.

Legislation was passed last September that banned mandatory sentences for minors convicted of murder. A community justice-approach was taken to those charged as juveniles. 

Legislation was passed last September that banned mandatory sentences for minors convicted of murder. Alamy Stock Image Alamy Stock Image

A High Court judge last year said it was ‘downright unjust’ that minors convicted of murder were given mandatory sentences, given the mitigating factors involved in their cases — such as their age and maturity.

Brady pointed to a review of research, published by the Department of Justice report last year, that reinforced the recommendation to scrap all mandatory sentences as it suggested no evidence existed to support their continued use. However, the report did not make the recommendation itself.

Better investment and reformed procedures

Brady said that the IPRT would support the introduction of a measure requiring judges to record why they hand down shorter sentences under exceptional circumstances.

She said that the group believes the qualitative data would allow for more coherent analysis. The IPRT said the idea could be considered by the Judicial Council’s Sentencing Guidelines and Information Committee.

Marder suggests that the government could take an evidence-based approach to this form of justice, that helps people solve the issues that convicted people may face and that led to committing an offence, as well as further investment in crime prevention services.

In response to The Journal, the Department of Justice spokesperson said: “In the specific case of the possession for sale or supply of drugs of a value of over €13,000, the majority of sentences handed down are considerably lower than the minimum sentence, meaning the judges in those cases have considered there to have been ‘exceptional circumstances’.”

Includes court reporting by Natasha Reid.