Enhancing the legitimacy of sentences in the minds of the public: Evidence from a public opinion survey in Hong Kong

Legal and criminology scholars have devoted a great deal of attention towards measuring public confidence in the courts and sentencing. However, little is known about how attitudes toward sentencing relate to the more complex concept of legitimacy. Departing from conventional measurements of the pub...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Cheng, Kevin Kwok-Yin (Author)
Contributors: Pushkarna, Natasha ; Ri, Sayaka
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: 2020
In: Punishment & society
Year: 2020, Volume: 22, Issue: 5, Pages: 617-636
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:
Description
Summary:Legal and criminology scholars have devoted a great deal of attention towards measuring public confidence in the courts and sentencing. However, little is known about how attitudes toward sentencing relate to the more complex concept of legitimacy. Departing from conventional measurements of the public’s confidence in the courts and their support for various sentence outcomes, this study centres on the process of sentencing and its relation to ‘sentence legitimacy’. The central question posed in this article is what makes sentence outcomes legitimate? Survey responses from the Hong Kong public revealed that the public viewed court sentences as legitimate through the courts’ overall adherence to procedural justice when making sentencing decisions and the perceived effectiveness of those sentences. Distributive justice of sentencing decisions was not found to influence sentence legitimacy. This article concludes with implications for the courts when delivering sentences.
ISSN:1741-3095
DOI:10.1177/1462474520915595