Understanding Thai Sentencing Culture
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study purports to identify key characteristics of Thai sentencing culture and proposes a theory for understanding them. The focus is not on the Penal Code but on Yee-Tok, a judicially self-imposed form of sentencing guidelines, the details of which are not publicly available and whose role in sentencing decision-making remains invisible to those beyond the judiciary. The aim is to find out how Yee-Tok works in the pursuit of consistency and accountability in sentencing.
The study finds that consistency and accountability are not alien concepts to Thai sentencers. Even though each lower court has a different Yee-Tok, evidence from focus groups of lower court judges appears to suggest that the differences between each Yee-Tok may be limited. In addition to the duty to sentence in accordance with the Penal Code monitored by the higher courts, Thai lower court judges, by convention, are expected to comply with Yee-Tok in their court and to consult their Chief Judge before departing from it. Although there is no statutory obligation to comply with Yee-Tok, this research finds that most judges appear to wish to comply with Yee-Tok. Consistency in sentencing outcomes in each court is achieved due to the compliance of all judges with the Yee-Tok of their court. Accountability in sentencing is understood as the need to ensure that sentencers adhere to judicial customs and observe high moral standards.
Three main characteristics of Thai sentencing culture were identified in this research: conformity in sentencing decision-making; the tendency to impose prison sentences relatively frequently; and the lack of demand in the eyes of the judiciary for public accountability in sentencing. These characteristics can be explained by a theory based on two conceptual building blocks: the judicial structure of a career judiciary; and Thailand’s political, social, and cultural context.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Alain Berthoz, Emotion and Reason: The Cognitive Neuroscience of Decision-Making (Oxford University Press 2006).
Andrew Ashworth, Sentencing and Criminal Justice (Cambridge University Press 2010).
Andrew Ashworth, Andrew von Hirsch and Juian Roberts, Principled Sentencing: Readings on Theory and Policy (3rd edn, Hart 2009).
Andrew Von Hirsch and Andrew Ashworth, Proportionate Sentencing: Exploring the Principles (Oxford University Press 2005).
Anja Seibert-Fohr (ed), Judicial Independence in Transition (Springer-Verlag 2012).
Brian H. Bornstein and Richard L. Weiner (eds), Emotion and the Law: Psychological Perspective (Springer 2010).
Catherine Fitzmaurice and Ken Pease, The Psychology of Judicial Sentencing (Manchester University Press 1986).
Chris Clarkson and Rod Morgan (eds), The Politics of Sentencing Reform (Clarendon Press 1995).
Colin Munro and Martin Wasik (eds), Sentencing, Judicial Discretion and Training (Sweet & Maxwell 1992).
Cyrus Tata and Neil Hutton (eds), Sentencing and Society (Ashgate 2002).
Dan Ariely, The Upside of Irrationality: The Unexpected Benefits of Defying Logic at Work and at Home (HarperCollins Publishers 2010).
Daniela Piana, Judicial Accountabilities in New Europe: From Rule of Law to Quality of Justice (Ashgate 2010).
David Nelken (ed), Contrasting Criminal Justice (Ashgate 2000).
Esin Örücü (ed), Mixed Legal Systems At New Frontiers (Wildy, Simmonds and Hill Publishing 2010).
Geraldine Mackenzie, How Judges Sentence (Federation Press 2005).
Hakeem O. Yusuf, Transitional Justice, Judicial Accountability and the Rule of Law (Routledge 2010).
Ioan Durnescu and Fergus McNeill, Understanding Penal Practice (Routledge 2014).
Keith Hawkins (ed), The Uses of Discretion (Clarendon Press 1992).
Keith Hawkins, Law as Last Resort Prosecution Decision-making in a Regulatory Agency (Oxford University Press 2002).
Loraine Gelsthrope and Nicola Padfield (eds), Exercising Discretion Decision-Making in the Criminal Justice System and Beyond (Willan Publishing 2003).
Marcus Bank, Using Visual Data in Qualitative Research (Sage 2007).
Martin Shapiro, Courts: A Comparative and Political Analysis (University of Chicago Press 1981).
Michael Lipsky, Street-level Bureaucracy Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services (Russell Sage Foundation 1980).
Michael Tonry, Sentencing Matters (Oxford university Press 1996).
Michael Tonry (ed), Crime, Punishment and Politics in Comparative Perspective Crime and Justice: A Review of Research Volume 36 (University of Chicago Press 2007).
Michael Tonry and Richard S. Frase (eds), Sentencing and Sanctions in Western Countries (Oxford University Press 2001).
Mike Broussine (ed), Creative Methods in Organizational Research (Sage 2008).
Mirjan R. Damaška, The Faces of Justice and State Authority: A Comparative Approach to the Legal Process (Yale University Press 1986).
Martin Wasik and Sotirios Santatzoglou (eds), The Management of Change in Criminal Justice: Who Knows Best?, (Palgrave Macmillan 2015).
Penny Darbyshire, Sitting in Judgment The Working Lives of Judges (Hart 2011).
Peter Cane and Herbert M. Kritzer (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Empirical Legal Research (Oxford University Press 2010).
Peter De Cruz, Comparative Law in a Changing World (3rd edn, Routledge-Cavendish 2008).
Reza Banakar and Max Travers, An Introduction to Law and Social Theory (2nd edn, Hart 2013).
Richard Frase, Just Sentencing Principles and Procedures for a Workable System (Oxford University Press 2013).
Rob C. Mawby and Anne Worrall, Doing Probation Work Identity in a Criminal Justice Occupation (Routledge 2013).
Seán Doran and John D. Jackson (eds), The Judicial Role in Criminal Proceeding (Hart 2000).
Simon Halliday and Patrick Schmidt (eds), Conducting Law and Society Research Reflections on Methods and Practices (Cambridge University Press 2009).
Shimon Shetreet and Sophie Turenne, Judges on Trial: The Independence and Accountability of the English Judiciary (2nd edn, Cambridge University Press 2013).
Standley Cohen, States of Denial Knowing about Atrocities and Suffering (Polity Press 2001).
Tom Bingham, The Rule of Law (Penguin Books 2010).
Tom Daems, Dirk van Zyl Smit, and Sonja Snacken (eds), European Penology? (Hart 2013).