How often have we heard or even used the phrase the world has become (is becoming) a much smaller place? Financially, socially and politically remove any language differences and those variations between many west European countries are vastly diminished from what held true in the 1970s & 80s. Of course the trend to supra national structures particularly the EU has played a major role in that coming together. For this country the apparent political alignment with the United States in so many ways is contradicted by an equally disparate approach to social structures and their applications.
Roe v Wade for many Americans was considered as sacrosanct as the constitution. It was overturned last June giving the power to decide on abortion rights to 50 states to determine individually. It triggered a wave of change. Abortion bans were brought in, court cases mounted, clinics closed. As many rejoiced with their fundamental Christian beliefs apparently ensconced many are in despair especially those in the lowest economic quartile who will bear the brunt of unwanted babies or death or serious harm from illegal abortions. Until recently such divisive opinion with equally divisive consequences was alien to this country but not any more. The case of Carla Foster has reminded many that abortion availability in Britain is also constrained by law. The sentencing remarks of the trial judge are available here. What has been of concern to some is that this offender, rightly convicted, was sentenced to immediate custody. His Honour`s reasoning is quoted below.
24.For the offence of administering poison with intent to procure a miscarriage, I sentence you to 28 months’ imprisonment. Among the many tragedies in this case is that you did not indicate your guilty plea at the earliest opportunity in the magistrates’ court. Had that been done, the sentence of imprisonment that I am now obliged to pass would in law have been capable of being suspended.
An interesting commentary is available here. The law on abortion and its application is very well explained in this article by Tony Dowson. However as with many facets of the legal system there is the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. The letter of the law is what the law states; the spirit of the law is a social and moral consensus of the interpretation of the letter. I fear that in some (many?) cases the judiciary, bound by their contracts of employment and afraid of irritating the hand that feeds them, are loath to consider the spirit. Punishment, deterrence, public safety and rehabilitation are the constituent parts developed over centuries which underline "the rule of law". Imprisonment is the last throw of the dice that sentencers are instructed to consider. Magistrates courts sentence around 4% of offenders to immediate custody. They are exhorted to reduce such sentences to the bare minimum and to use every expedient to that end. Some judges in the crown court have openly made that point in their pronouncement that they have been directed not to push the prison population beyond its current limit. In the Foster case any judicial compassion was thrown overboard in the name of the "Guidelines". An appeal against sentence is lodged.
Earlier this year on March 7th I commented on another widely reported case where a handicapped woman was sentenced to immediate custody. Aside from the factual inconsistency of the path`s designation this sentence too can be aligned with Foster`s as being of the type where "the computer says no" to custody suspended. This is a worrying trend. Is it a misogynistic throwback to earlier times, a fear of upsetting lords and masters or more worryingly a justice system becoming ever more controlled by the executive with a supine judiciary losing sight of what happens in and to a society when the spirit of the law is undermined or extinguished?
No comments:
Post a Comment