The implementation of sentencing guidelines in Maltese criminal procedure : an analysis

Abstract

This term paper is aimed at identifying the ideal step in Maltese Procedural law to embrace a truly holistic judicial reform. Unfortunately, there is no plethora of research neither on a global nor on a national level despite the level of contention that the sentencing process brings with it. Nonetheless, there are ongoing local judicial reforms initiatives, including the Holistic Judicial Reform document, chaired by Judge Emeritus Giovanni Bonello that insists on the implementation of an approach identical to the one suggested in this study. This study starts by identifying the inconsistencies that persist in sentencing that prove that ‘like cases are not treated alike’ and this has been done via a comparative methodology. The study goes on by analyzing various models in foreign jurisdictions aimed at tackling this inconsistency persisting in sentencing. It will then choose the one model that the author deems to be the most ideal to be implemented locally, which will be explained step by step. The study goes on to analyze how implementation of the said model will eradicate the sentencing practices currently flawing our jurisprudence, inter alia mandatory minimums whilst retaining the elementary requisites necessary for individualized sentencing by ‘structuring’ judicial discretion. The author will also analyze the stance adopted by the European Union aimed at eliminating disparate sentencing of similar offences and thereby increasing efficacy and consistency.