Sentencing the multiple offender : judicial practice and legal principle
This study examines the approach of Victorian judges to the determination of sentence for an offender convicted of multiple offences. Given that a substantial percentage of criminal cases involve a multiple offender and that the majority of offences are committed by repeat offenders, the sentencing of such offenders is a matter of significant public policy interest. The study is based on qualitative interviews with a group of Victorian County Court judges, an analysis of sentencing data on rape, armed robbery and burglary from Victorian County Court records, and a legal review of High Court decisions and Victorian Court of Appeal decisions. The study examines the way judges apply the totality principle in sentencing multiple offenders; whether sentences imposed these cases conform to the principle of proportionality; and whether proportionality, in respect to the multiple offender, can be expressed as a detailed policy, with associated guidelines. The empirical work undertaken in this study indicates that there is a need to develop a more detailed and comprehensive set of sentencing principles and an associated numerical framework for guidance.
Justice Sector Seriousness Score ( 2016 update ) : FAQs
What are seriousness scores? ..........................................................................................................................1 Why do we have seriousness scores? ..............................................................................................................1 Why don’t we use maximum penalties instead? .............................................................................................1 What are some illustrative seriousness scores? ..............................................................................................2 How are seriousness scores calculated now? ..................................................................................................3 How did we measure seriousness before 2012? .............................................................................................4 Why was seriousness measurement revised in 2012? ....................................................................................4 What are main changes in the 2012 revision?.................................................................................................4 What are limitations that users should be alert to? ........................................................................................5 References .......................................................................................................................................................7 Appendix: Calculation of seriousness scores (details) .....................................................................................8
Social Health Insurance Reforms—Mid-Term Experiences of Poland and Russia
As a result of transition process to market economy, Poland and Russia have come a long way from a centrally planned budget for social security to an insurance-type model in the social sphere. After more than two decades of reforms, it seems essential to compare and evaluate the policy solutions introduced in terms of the reform goals achieved and exposure to current challenges. The paper presents an analysis and comparison of social health insurance reforms conducted in Poland and Russia since the beginning of the 1990s. Moreover, the current problems of and future challenges for health care financing systems are identified. The varied experiences of Poland and Russia over more than 20 years show mid-term lessons which could be useful to other countries, especially those that face socio-economic transformation, in their choice of strategy and the practice of similar reforms.