INDIVIDUALIZATION OF PUNISHMENT

Abstract

          The objectives of this research article were: 1) to study concepts, theories and development about punishments appropriate for the individual. 2) to study the law about punishments suitable for individuals of Thailand and foreign country. 3) to study and analyze of problems relating to the use of discretion in punishing and collect an evidence to examination principle problems relate  the role of the prosecutor in the sentencing process punishment and the problem of the role of the court in the sentencing process                4) to suggest an improve Thai law criminal procedure code of determining the punishment appropriate to individuals according with the principles of Individual of punishment. This research was a qualitative one based documentary research upon the analytic. The results of research were found as follows: determination of punishment that are not arbitrary (subjectivity), but within the framework of the law that has been clearly defined in advance (objectivity). Determination of punishment in Thailand, the court chose to use pending punishment or waiting for the determination of punishment instead of punishment imprison for the offender if entering the list as required by law. This will result in the offender not having to be imprisoned. Therefore is a way for the court to use discretion in selecting the criminal penalty appropriate for the offender. The attitude which should align with the objectives of individualization punishment, the justification in civil laws determination of punishment of “the facts” and “the objectives of individualization punishment” must conjoint at the level of without any arguments. The most crucial things of individualization of punishment were “the clarification of data regarding both allegation and individual” and “the double check investigation of discretion in punishment”. This caused the penalty had to investigate from 2 governmental organizations in the process of determination of punishment and the court had to play the role of proactive fact finding as a coadjutant check that could receive the data clearly. As the result of coercion was a compulsory knowledge for the civil law lawyers and would lead to attitude that aligned with individual of punishment.