Nicholson Ends 2-for-1 Special

Justice Minister Rob Nicholson has ended the discretionary practice of giving criminals double credit on time served awaiting trial. Previously, for example, a convict who had waited two years for trial could take four years off their sentence (or in the case of the deplorable Don Jail, six years at three-for-one).

In a National Post editorial, Nicholson wrote:

This awarding of extra credit lead not only to the perception that sentences were too lenient — it also lead to the reality that, all too often, criminals were being released back on our streets far too soon.

Of course he did not offer any evidence as to why these criminals had been released too soon.

Nor did he mention the justification that had led to the two-for-one option in the first place – reasons such as the “terrible conditions” that exist in correctional facilities. Reasons such as that the prison system is grossly overcrowded. Reasons such as that time served before a trial is psychologically harsher than time served after conviction/acquittal.

Nicholson did not explain how the new law will substantively prevent crime, or relieve the conditions that inmates awaiting trial endure. One can only conclude that the new law will lead to even more overcrowding in correctional facilities.

The reason for the new law is optics. As I wrote recently, political dialogue has become locked in a false “tough on crime” or “soft on crime” dichotomy. Nicholson is determined to show that his party is tough on crime (not to vindicate the other parties, all of whom supported the bill, especially the Liberals). Nicholson in the Post editorial:

The Truth in Sentencing Act is a major step forward in restoring Canadians’ confidence that justice is being served, and we won’t stop there

And Nicholson to the CBC:

This will bring more truth in sentencing and give Canadians confidence that justice is being served

Let’s remember that the criminal law is not about public perception, and it’s not designed to compensate victims (for that we have tort law), rather the criminal law is designed to keep society safe and functional. I fail to see how this bill adds to that goal, and neither Nicholson nor anyone else has indicated that the bill does anything but play off of fear and misconception.