HC Deb 24 May 1972 vol 837 cc416-7W
Mr. Elystan Morgan

asked the Attorney-General to what extent advice is given to magistrates on their appointment of circumstances in which it would be appropriate to grant an absolute discharge.

The Attorney-General

The basic training course which newly appointed justices are required to complete within a year of their appointment includes instruction on the problems of punishment and treatment with particular reference to the objectives of sentencing; possible sentences; the factors influencing the choice of a particular sentence; and consistency in sentencing. This includes advice on the circumstances in which it would be appropriate to grant an absolute discharge. In my noble Friend's view, an absolute discharge is not normally a suitable order to make in cases where the usual penalty would be a small monetary fine appropriate to the means of the defendant.

Mr. Elystan Morgan

asked the Attorney-General if he will, in conjunction with the Lord Chancellor, conduct an inquiry into the recent sentencing practice of magistrates' courts in the cases of defendants who have committed offences for ostensibly idealistic reasons.

The Attorney-General

Subject only to a maximum sentence fixed by Parliament, magistrates' courts and all other criminal courts have unfettered discretion in dealing with offenders. It would be contrary to constitutional practice to seek to interfere with this discretion by executive inquiry into the sentencing practice of particular courts or with relation to certain classes of cases or defendants. My noble Friend, however, proposes to take suitable opportunity to remind magistrates of their duty and of the obligation which they have taken upon themselves by their oath when accepting appointment. Where magistrates have shown bias or contempt for law in their decisions or their observations in court, my noble Friend will have no alternative but to ask them to resign or, in default, to remove their names from the commission.