Mandatory Sentencing and the Role of the Academic

The 1990s witnessed an increase in the number of mandatory sentences created around the common law world. Australia was part of this trend and along with England1 adopted versions of the United States three strikes laws. Canada also passed a record number of mandatory sentences between 1982 and 1999.2 In Australia during the 1990s, mandatory sentencing laws for property offences were enacted in Western Australia and the Northern Territory in response to a moral panic based on a perception that the criminal justice system was not taking victims rights seriously, and that sentencing courts were passing inconsistent and excessively lenient sentences as a consequence of taking into account factors such as race and socioeconomic deprivation.3 In response, from at least 1998 and through to 2002, there was a plethora of journal articles, conference papers, book chapters, reports and other commentary addressing the issue of mandatory sentencing. The torrent of publications has slowed to a trickle but the themes underlying the debate, namely discriminatory sentencing practices and legislative attempts to promote both consistency and harsher sentences remain.