Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Introduction

Introduction    [  ] I N T R O D U C T I O N During the period May – June  , the European Court of Human Rights made a number of decisions clarifying the law. Article  – Right to liberty and security It may now be regarded as established in UK domestic law that there is no distinc- tion between mandatory life prisoners, discretionary life prisoners and juvenile murderers as regards the nature of tariff-fixing. It is a sentencing exercise. The mandatory life sentence does not impose imprisonment for life as a punishment. The tariff, which reflects the individual circumstances of the offence and the of- fender, represents the element of punishment. Once the punishment element of the sentence (as reflected in the tariff ) has been satisfied, the grounds for the con- tinued detention, as in discretionary life and juvenile murderer cases, must be considerations of risk and dangerousness. ( Stafford v. the United Kingdom ) The Court cannot accept that a decision-making power by the executive to detain an applicant on the basis of perceived fears of future non-violent criminal conduct unrelated to his original murder conviction accords with the http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Human Rights Case Digest Brill

Introduction

Human Rights Case Digest , Volume 13 (5-6): 413 – Jan 1, 2002

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/introduction-ME0ZSB142q

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2002 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0965-934X
eISSN
1571-8131
DOI
10.1163/157181302100394898
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

   [  ] I N T R O D U C T I O N During the period May – June  , the European Court of Human Rights made a number of decisions clarifying the law. Article  – Right to liberty and security It may now be regarded as established in UK domestic law that there is no distinc- tion between mandatory life prisoners, discretionary life prisoners and juvenile murderers as regards the nature of tariff-fixing. It is a sentencing exercise. The mandatory life sentence does not impose imprisonment for life as a punishment. The tariff, which reflects the individual circumstances of the offence and the of- fender, represents the element of punishment. Once the punishment element of the sentence (as reflected in the tariff ) has been satisfied, the grounds for the con- tinued detention, as in discretionary life and juvenile murderer cases, must be considerations of risk and dangerousness. ( Stafford v. the United Kingdom ) The Court cannot accept that a decision-making power by the executive to detain an applicant on the basis of perceived fears of future non-violent criminal conduct unrelated to his original murder conviction accords with the

Journal

Human Rights Case DigestBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2002

There are no references for this article.