MANDATORY MINIMUMS DON'T WORK

There is an inexcusable gap in resources for the mentally ill and this
leads directly to an increase in crime rates for this population.
Often, the only option available to a judge is to sentence the
individual to a period of incarceration. Either appropriate facilities
don't exist or there is no discretion in the Criminal Code for the
individual to be housed elsewhere.

The resources in prisons for the mentally ill are almost non-existent.
They are often worse off when released, as whatever support systems
they had in the community, such as housing, are no longer available.

The federal government proposes to "tackle violent crime" by passing
legislation that would see more mandatory minimum sentences. Mandatory
minimum sentences do not lower crime rates, as a number of research
studies have shown.

The Canadian Bar Association, representing both defence and Crown
counsel, has made numerous submissions to Parliament on this issue.
Mandatory minimum sentences take away all discretion from a judge. A
judge bound by a mandatory minimum sentence is not able to impose a
sentence that provides a mentally ill or drug addicted offender with
the appropriate rehabilitative sentence. I am not advocating leniency,
rather, flexibility.

What is missing from the government's sales pitch is the cost. Crown
prosecutors lose their ability to negotiate and accused individuals
will have nothing to lose by going to trial. A conservative estimate
is that we will need 10 to 15 more judges in B.C. to handle the
additional cases that proceed to trial. Our prisons are already
overcrowded.

These are costs that will be picked up by the province. If this money
is used instead to provide appropriate resources to those with mental
illnesses and drug addictions, we will actually see a decrease in
crime rates.

Sue Wishart,

lawyer,

Victoria