NCJ Number
89153
Date Published
1983
Length
9 pages
Annotation
The ineffectiveness and high cost of imprisonment requires that more sentencing options be developed rather than having imprisonment stand as the basic option with other dispositions viewed as lenient 'alternatives to incarceration.'
Abstract
In Canada, as a result of the recommendations of the Ouimet report in 1969, Parliament introduced absolute and conditional discharges and intermittent incarceration into the Criminal Code. That report also resulted in the establishment of a wide range of pilot and demonstration projects that used fines, diversion, restitution programs, and community service. Throughout the 1960's and 70's, the growth of probation services and private aftercare programs provided the focus for the 'alternatives movement.' In 1976 the Law Reform Commission of Canada published a report on dispositions and sentences which pushed this theme even further. It is time, however, to stop thinking in terms of 'alternatives to incarceration' and establish a variety of sentencing options as recommendations for various offenses. The ineffectiveness and high cost of incarceration are sufficient justifications for starting to think of such sanctions as probation, fines, community service work, restitution, compensation orders, and other approaches as legitimate, effective, and appropriate sanctions in their own right. Sentencing in the past has also generally ignored the crime victim's needs. More attention should be given to how the offender can provide restitution or compensation to the victim to relieve the damage and loss suffered because of the crime. A Federal Provincial task force is now examining the extent of and the need of victim services.