the essential
During its parliamentary session, this Thursday, the RN proposes to establish minimum sentences for certain crimes and misdemeanors. What does this legal procedure already applied in France between 2007 and 2014 correspond to? And above all, is it effective in reducing recidivism?
The National Rally is taking advantage of its parliamentary niche, this Thursday, October 31 in the evening, to propose reintroducing minimum sentences in France.
Also read:
INTERVIEW. “No, justice is not lax”, assures Didier Migaud
Government spokesperson Maud Bregeon had already indicated on Public Senate that the executive would not support such a measure. Minimum sentences “have already been tried from 2007 to 2014 and have not demonstrated their effectiveness because recidivism has not decreased,” she says. Is this true? La Dépêche looked at the figures.
What is the principle of minimum penalties?
In France, justice provides maximum sentences to punish crimes and misdemeanors, but no minimum sentences. This is what minimum sentences correspond to: it is a question of preventing a person found guilty from being given a sentence without detention or without a fine.
Established under Nicolas Sarkozy in 2007 and abolished in 2014 by François Hollande, these penalties concerned, in particular, attacks on persons holding public authority.
Are they effective in reducing recidivism?
The law on minimum sentences adopted in August 2007 introduced harsh minimum sentences against repeat legal offenders, that is to say people convicted for the second time for similar acts. According to an evaluation made at the beginning of 2024 by the Institute of Public Policies, the reform was followed by effects, in the sense that “we see a very clear increase in the sanctions imposed against repeat offenders as soon as it is adopted”.
In this case, the firm sentences against the latter were 50% higher, the suspended sentences with probation 3 times higher.
More “the law did not have a deterrent effect in the short term”indicates the public body. “In the medium term, people who received these minimum sentences reoffended less (10% lower probability), but only for offenses punishable by minimum sentences.”
In other words, their likelihood of committing further offenses did not change. Furthermore, “the weak distribution to co-convicts resulted in to a weak overall dissuasive effect of the reform“, conclude the authors.
France
