Canberra's leading victims advocate has urged tough reforms to the ACT's use of suspended sentences, arguing the punishment often left "dissatisfied" victims and the community with the impression offenders who avoided jail had been "let off".
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Outgoing ACT Victims of Crime Commissioner John Hinchey said the sentences had benefits but were often controversial and "arguably inappropriate" for offenders convicted of serious crimes, in an issues paper released on Wednesday.
Suspended sentences are a term of imprisonment that is imposed on an offender but served outside prison under the conditions of a good behaviour order. The offender risks being sent to prison to serve their sentence if they breach those conditions.
Mr Hinchey recommended limiting the availability of fully suspended sentences for serious offences and beefing up good behaviour order conditions to bolster their "punitive and rehabilitative elements".
He also suggested tighter consequences for offenders who breached those conditions and a presumption the original sentence be activated in those cases.
"However, these characteristics are arguably now embodied within the new [intensive corrections order] regime, raising questions as to whether suspended sentences are necessary at all."
The ACT government said in 2011 it remained committed to suspended sentences as a way to denounce an offender's conduct, promote rehabilitation and cut recidivism.
But recent cases cast doubt over their effectiveness and raised concerns they weren't appropriate given victims and the community often viewed a suspended sentence as offenders being "let off" or given a "slap on the wrist", the report said.
Mr Hinchey said offenders who breached their conditions in the ACT often weren't sent to jail to serve the original term of imprisonment, and the "deterrent effects" were "diminished" if that consequence wasn't applied consistently.
The report said the ACT was the only jurisdiction where there wasn't a presumption the original term of imprisonment would be activated due to a breach, and courts had the power to either impose the original sentence or to re-sentence the offender.
Mr Hinchey cited research noting a suspended sentence was often referred to as the "Sword of Damocles", with the threat of a prison sentence being activated should an offender fail to meet his or her obligations under a suspended sentence.
"However, if suspended sentences are rarely activated upon breach, this makes a farce of the suspended sentence option, and the 'Sword of Damocles' becomes barely a butter knife," the report said.
Mr Hinchey, who will step down in December after seven years in his role, questioned the appropriateness of suspended sentences for very serious offences, particularly sex crimes.
"Victims, their family and their friends often express high levels of dissatisfaction with suspended sentences."
He also criticised the high percentage of suspended sentences imposed for protection order breaches, saying it sent a "mixed message" to the community about the courts' resolve to respond strongly to the prevalence of family violence.
An ACT Law Reform Advisory Council report in 2010 showed 26 per cent of breaches of fully suspended sentences in the ACT led to an offender's original sentence being activated and questioned whether laws should be strengthened.
The government vowed to consult with stakeholders but those talks never happened, Mr Hinchey said.
A spokeswoman for ACT Attorney-General Gordon Ramsay said the government was committed to addressing crime and reducing recidivism, and it would consider the commissioner's recommendations.
"The government is taking a number of steps to both address instances of violence in the community as well as setting appropriate penalties for those who are convicted of such offences."
