Legal inconsistency

Sentencing is subject to a form of inflation, with the judiciary increasing sentences in a pattern inconsistent both with their peers in the same country and with those in other countries. This results in significant differences in the prison population (per 100,000 of the general population) in neighbouring countries (at 1989): UK 97.4%, Turkey 95.6, Luxembourg 86.5, West Germany 84.5, Portugal 83, France 81.1, Denmark 68, Belgium 65.4, Italy 60, Sweden 56, Netherlands 40.

1. Outmoded legal systems
2. Fragmented decision-making
3. Arbitrariness

1. Non-recognition of foreign powers of attorney
2. Excessive leniency in sentencing of offenders

1. Racial disparities in criminal convictions
2. Collapse of judicial system

1. Unethical practices in the legal system
2. Statutory instability

1. Unchanging legal precedent undermines accountability

1. Government failure to prosecute offenders

1. Sentencing offenders
2. Providing legal consistency
3. Predicting judicial decisions
4. Coping with unpredictability of judicial decisions

1. Unpredictability
2. Stability
3. Offence
4. Instability
5. Inconsistency
6. Illegality
7. Consistency