Used appropriately, “joined-up” community sentences will cut reoffending.

Community service ‘too hard for felons’. The Sunday Times, 18 October 2009 >> article

VIEWPOINT: The loudest voices in the offender/punishment debate would have us believe the public are generally in favour of locking offenders up rather than handing down “soft” community sentences. We now have a report which states many sentencers would rather impose custodial sentences because existing community sentences are too tough.

They are both right and they are both wrong.

Of course a custodial sentence is normally appropriate for a dangerous offender. However, it does little to help an offender whose behaviour stems from drug/alcohol misuse or a mental health issue. Similarly, a young person with a string of minor crimes to their name is unlikely to be put off by spending a few weeks in a crowded prison with hardened criminals for company.

One of the key aspects of managing offending behaviour is appropriateness of disposal. The government’s proposal that encourages sentencers to impose Community Payback Orders over short custodial sentences is simply acting on the wealth of evidence which points to this being a more effective approach. Judges and sheriffs will continue to hand down whichever disposal they deem appropriate but it would be remiss of them not to consider which option was more likely to stop the person offending again. Recent figures for Scotland show that almost 75% of those serving short-term custodial sentences will reoffend within two years. This rate is practically halved for those given community sentences and Sacro believes there is considerable potential for lowering that reoffending rate if community sentences are more “joined-up”.

Although punishment forms the basis of a sentence, it is of little use without an element of rehabilitation. If an offender’s behaviour stems from drug misuse, it stands to reason that the trigger of drug misuse must be addressed or the cycle will continue. Similarly, a sentence should have a component whereby the victim receives some reparation for the harm caused to them. Victims are not always individuals; in many cases criminal activity impacts on whole communities or businesses or schools.

An effective community sentence has the potential to include these three elements of punishment, rehabilitation and reparation. It also provides an opportunity to be both flexible and creative. Payback is not all about breaking rocks in the hot sun. It could just as easily entail stuffing envelopes for a charity mail-shot.

It should be remembered that a community sentence is a sanction handed down to an offender in the same way a custodial sentence is. It needs to begin straight away and complied with in full. This will require significant resources and infrastructure and it is reasonable to expect adequate funding will be made available and afforded the same importance as custodial sentences.

If sentencers believed handing down a community sentence meant it would be: carried out quickly, proportionate to the nature of the offence, addressed the harm caused to the victim and reduced the chances of that person reoffending – surely they would use it and the public would thank them for it.