This debate is being fueled by the Lib Dem MP Josh Babarinde, who has been vocal about the need for a more nuanced approach to crime and punishment. Babarinde argues that short sentences are not a tough on crime solution. He believes that the focus should be on rehabilitation and reintegration into society.
This presumption, however, was not legally binding. It was a recommendation, and its effectiveness was debated. The presumption against short sentences was based on the idea that they could be used to manipulate the reader, potentially leading to a lack of clarity and understanding. This concern was particularly relevant in the legal context, where clarity and precision are paramount. The presumption against short sentences was not without its critics.
It called for the reform of the prison system, including the introduction of a new “community-based rehabilitation programme” and the expansion of existing programmes. The Liberal Democrats have long been vocal about the need for prison reform. They have consistently argued that the current system is too punitive and fails to address the root causes of crime.
PA Babarinde is one of 72 Lib Dem MPs, after the party’s success in July’s general election Babarinde said: “We know ex-offenders who are in employment are less likely to reoffend. And if we want to tackle the problem of offending in our society and the prison overcrowding crisis, we must reduce reoffending. So I sought to do that in a very practical way.” He was advised by Lord Timpson, whose key-cutting and shoe repair business has made a point of hiring hundreds of former prisoners. Judging sentences
