Sentencing in Maltese courts : a gender based analysis

Abstract

This thesis is set to explore whether discrepancies exist between male and female offenders who appear in front of the Court of Magistrates (Criminal Judicature) and to explore the reasons why this occurs. Another aim of this study is to identify which types of crimes are mostly committed by females in Malta and whether aggravating factors and/or mitigating factors as well as sympathetic life circumstances can influence the type of sentence meted out. In order to answer the research questions a comparison and analysis between similar crimes committed by females and males was performed. The theoretical framework used in this research is that of the Focal Concerns Theory which attributes the more lenient sentences received by female offenders to the fact that the judiciary see female offenders as less blameworthy, less dangerous to society and to practical constraints both on an individual level as well as on a logistical level. The other theory to be tested is the Paternalism/Chivalry Theory which states that the judiciary views female offenders as naïve and therefore in need to protection. Hence they are meted out lenient sentences. This theory also includes the Evil Woman Hypothesis which states that when female offenders commit a crime which is usually perpetrated by males, the female offender will be met with harsher penalties because she is breaking the law and most importantly, she is going against socially accepted gender norms. The research method used in this thesis is that of a Mixed Methods approach. The quantitative research method consisted of gathering data of female offenders who were found guilty of a crime from criminal court sentences published online from the year 2005 to the year 2020. Subsequently the crimes were compared with similar crimes committed by males in the years 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2020. The factual information gathered through the quantitative approach helped in formulating the semi-structured interview guide which was used to interview ten professionals working/or used to work in the criminal justice field. A thematic analysis was used as a qualitative research method to place the author in a better position to answer the research questions while portraying exactly the participants’ opinions and experiences on the subject matter. The results of the quantitative approach clearly showed that there are gender discrepancies in Maltese criminal sentencing. Other results include the facts that Females are associated with Assault, Financial crimes, Sexual offenses, and Threats and that Assault is more common among EU and Non-EU Females and that Females are consistently associated with non-incarceration sentences, while males are associated with incarceration sentences. Different themes emerged after an in-depth analysis of the information gathered from participants; Female Offenders’ Demeanor in Court; Societal Views and Gender Stereotypes influencing the Criminal Court’s View of Female Offenders; the Validity of the Evil Woman Hypothesis, Sentencing Practice Outcomes between Male and Female Magistrates and finally the Introduction of Sentencing Guidelines in the Maltese Criminal Court Context. This research highlights the importance of the introduction of sentencing guidelines in the Maltese Criminal Court system. Another policy recommendation is to provide training in relation to stereotypical attitudes to the Judiciary.