Reports Singapore Law Watch
http://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/slw/headlinesnews/50187-database-of-state-court-cases-to-be-launched-next-year.html?utm_source=email%20subscription&utm_medium=email
SINGAPORE — A database of the results of cases prosecuted in the State Courts — with the aim of assisting the Bench maintain consistency in sentencing — is expected to be launched next year, Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon said yesterday.
First announced at the State Courts’ workplan seminar in 2012, the database, called the Sentencing Information and Research Repository, will record all relevant details of cases, including specific circumstances, aggravating and mitigating factors, and the eventual sentence.
“Although sentencing is a matter of discretion, that discretion is never to be exercised arbitrarily,” said CJ Menon, who was speaking yesterday at the inaugural two-day Sentencing Conference held at the Supreme Court. “Broad consistency in sentencing also provides society with a clear understanding of what and how the law seeks to punish, and allows for members of society to have regard to this in arranging their own affairs and making their own choices.”
However, arriving at the correct sentence in each case is not just the courts’ role. Prosecutors owe a duty to assist the court in doing so, noted CJ Menon.
Outlining the prosecutorial role in sentencing, he added that because it acts only in the public interest, “there would generally be no need for the prosecution to adopt a strictly adverserial position”, unlike for lawyers in private lawsuits.
“Private victories tend to be measured by the size of the damages awarded. But the prosecutorial function is not calibrated by that scale,” he said.
Instead, prosecutors should not only secure convictions in a lawful and ethical manner, but secure the appropriate sentence too, he added.
CJ Menon said the prosecution has a vital role to play, for example, by identifying the relevant sentencing precedents, benchmarks and guidelines to the court.
Although the prosecution may take the position that a certain sentencing range is appropriate in the circumstances, it must present all the relevant material to enable the court to come to its conclusion on what the just sentence should be, he added. It should also inform the court of the offender’s suitability for other sentencing options that might be available.
On the courts’ part, CJ Menon said judges are accountable for their sentencing decisions and it is therefore “incumbent” on them to explain, at least in brief, the reasons that underlie their rulings.
This is especially so in criminal cases because “personal liberties are affected”, he noted. AMANDA LEE
