THE public outcry over cases of 'lenient sentencing' by judges has prompted calls for tighter links between the community and the criminal justice system.
A proposal to set up a standing committee on sentencing policy involving the public was put forward during a seminar held by the Hong Kong Council of Social Service yesterday.
The head of City University's Department of Professional Legal Education, Professor Edward Tyler, questioned whether the public would prefer the broad discretionary sentencing system judges currently employed, or a more restrictive method used in other countries.
He said at present there was no public input into determining appropriate maximum penalties.
The former District Court judge said the body would consist of judges, lawyers and other representatives of the justice system, along with the public.
'But a major danger is public knee-jerk reactions,' he said. 'There is a danger if the justice system reacts to moral panic brought about by well-publicised cases where victims' relatives may think sentences were too light. Much better that levels of sentence should be considered quietly and rationally as a continuing exercise rather than a reaction to particular cases.' Some people have called for the restoration of the death penalty for violent crime, particularly after the controversial chloroform killing case - in which sentences of the man and woman found guilty were increased significantly after an appeal from the victim's family, and the Shekkipmei bank arson - in which the defendant was sentenced to 20 years' jail for the manslaughter of 12 people.