I am intrigued by this whole debate regarding minimum mandatory sentences.
Ms. Costom, you indicated that sentencing principles require proportionality and individualization of sentences, and that in the view of the Canadian Bar Association, judges are in the best position to determine those matters.
I have two questions. What role does Parliament play in sentencing guidelines, since we live in a democracy, not a judiocracy? As well, why does the Canadian Bar Association consistently lobby against minimum mandatory sentences but not maximum mandatory sentences, such as 14 years for fraud? Why is it only on the minimum side that we hear the Canadian Bar Association voice its opposition?