1998-2008: State and citizen - when two parties break up
When a person is found not guilty by their jury, it was long thought that that represented the limit of the power of the state to impose punishment upon the citizen. This had been seen to be a legitimate balance and counterbalance between the powers and resources of the state and the relative weakness of the individual within a democratic society. But over the last two decades, this historic axis has been slowly shifted.
Twenty years ago, the Court of Appeal would only hear appeals brought by defendants who had been convicted or sentenced in the crown court, and the prosecution had no right of redress if it was of the view that a defendant had been wrongly acquitted or inadequately sentenced.
The Criminal Justice Act 1988, ss 35 and 36, provided that a sentence may be increased upon the attorney general’s reference. Parliament thus gave the state power to challenge the sentence of a judge, and though creating a fault-line in the delicate
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=961ae4db_1)
95ca96e3d47f4eff8d147c4f0df17c77.tmb-mov69x69.png?sfvrsn=3db5d86b_1)
