Problems of sentencing in Tanzania: a case study of Dar es Salaam magistrates' courts

The Tanzania penal system offers a variety of sentences which can be imposed on a convicted offender. However, the choice of which sentence and the assessment (where there is need) thereof is a difficult task. The difficulty comes in because there is a lacuna in the law of sentencing. The Law does not provide sufficient guidance on how the courts should proceed with sentencing. The only guidance provided by the law is the provision for prior receipt of evidence to enable a judge or magistrate pass a proper sentence discretion. The other attempt made to control sentencing through legislation has been to fix the maximum and in some offences, the minimum sentences. The jurisdictional limits of the courts has also been set by the law. Apart from the above controls, sentencing has been left entirely on the judges and magistrates. Consequently, the choice and assessment of sentences to be imposed is made on the basis of the judges and magistrates own subjective tests. This has resulted in great variations in sentences of the same or similar offences. The problem is further enhanced because the present penal system is not of our own indigenous growth. It was superimposed by the colonialists. The sentences are therefore alien to this country. Besides, there is no agreement on what objective should be served by punishment. At official level sentences are being justified as reformative while in the courts they are being justified as either retributive or deterrent. But to the judge or magistrate, whether it is reformation or retribution or deterrence which is being stressed, the problem is to choose and assess sentences which will serve any of the mentioned objectives because no studies have been carried out to test and ascertain which sentences can better serve any of the above objectives. The introduction of a tariff system through minimum sentences has also not solved the problem