Moderate and Non-Arbitrary Sentencing without Guidelines: The German Experience

By Hornle, Tatjana | Law and Contemporary Problems, Winter 2013 | Go to article overview

Moderate and Non-Arbitrary Sentencing without Guidelines: The German Experience


Hornle, Tatjana, Law and Contemporary Problems


I

INTRODUCTION

The participants in the symposium for which this paper was written discussed sentencing reforms in different countries. Compared to the situation in other countries (such as Australia, Israel, England and Wales, and the United States) Germany stands out: sentencing laws have not undergone major reforms recently, nor are such reforms being discussed. Sentencing reform is not a political issue and the sentencing reform movement has not reached Germany. The notion that the legislature (either parliament or commissions working on behalf of parliament) should regulate judges' control of sentencing is alien to the contemporary German discourse. There is no pressure in this direction from either the public or academic circles. This provides an astonishing contrast with developments elsewhere, and requires an explanation. What accounts for this passivity? Why are Germans content to leave the control of a crucial step in the application of the criminal law solely in the hands of the judiciary?

Two possible explanations come to mind. It might be the case that German sentencing rules and practices in fact need reform, and the lack of reform proposals reflects a lack of critical evaluation or political inactivity in the face of known deficiencies. Or there is a simpler explanation: If the current system, without sentencing guidelines, works fairly well overall (that is, if it achieves both a satisfying degree of equality in sentencing and moderate, reasonable sentences) then this could provide a rational explanation for why reform is not on the political agenda. I tend towards the second explanation. Of course, it would be hyperbolic to claim that the situation concerning sentencing is perfect in Germany. In previous publications I have criticized the status quo of German sentencing theory from a normative perspective, (1) and it is still the case that a lot needs to be done to improve both principles and rules. In part II of this article, the legal provisions of the German Criminal Code are sketched out, showing that they do not provide sufficient guidance for sentencing. But if one moves beyond sentencing theory and beyond the demand for improvement within the national legal framework, and instead focuses on sentencing practices from a comparative perspective, then a somewhat more optimistic stance seems defensible. As I am not a criminologist, I will not present my own empirical research. Instead, I will give a short overview of available data in part III, data which supports the conclusion that sentencing in Germany appears to be fairly moderate and consistent. The next step will be to suggest hypotheses in order to explain the status quo. What could be the factors that insulate a system against the danger of becoming overly harsh and punitive (as can arguably be seen in parts of the U.S. legal system, including the U.S. federal system) (2) and the danger of arbitrary sentencing decisions that produce a high degree of disparity? In part IV, circumstances of this kind will be considered. My more modest aim is to point out some influences that should (among others) be taken into account within complex models to explain why systems can achieve satisfactory sentencing outcomes without intensive legislative control.

II

THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK

A. Sentencing Provisions in the German Criminal Code

The major source for substantive criminal law in Germany is the Criminal Code, which was introduced in 1871. The Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure are federal laws, and courts within the sixteen German "Lander" apply these uniform federal laws. (3) The Criminal Code combines offense descriptions with a sentence range for each offense in its Special Part, and in its General Part it stipulates general principles for sentencing. (4) With respect to the kind of sanctions available, major reforms took place in the twentieth century. The most important changes were: the abolition of the death penalty (see Article 102 of the Basic Law--the German Constitution--and the corresponding reform of the German Criminal Code in 19535); a reform of the modes of imprisonment, which were originally more differentiated than today; (6) the availability of suspended sentences was introduced and expanded several times; (7) and the day-fine system was introduced in 1974. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Moderate and Non-Arbitrary Sentencing without Guidelines: The German Experience
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.