AIMS OF PUNISHMENT

FOUR TRADITIONAL THEORIES:

 RETRIBUTION
 DETERRENCE
 INCAPACITATION
 REFORMATION
RETRIBUTION

 Indicates vengeance; right to strike back at criminals on an

‘eye for an eye’ or ‘tooth for a tooth’ basis.
 Eg: whipping in response to crimes of violence, death
penalty for offences of murder.
 Rationale of desire for vengeance:
i) the victim among his relatives or friends
ii) the public itself has a need for vengeance
 PP v Loo Choon Fatt (1976) 2 MLJ 165, it was stated that
retribution play no part in public interest in sentencing.
 Hari Ram Seghal v PP (1981) 2 MLJ 256, it was stated that the
court recognised the retribution and thus highlight that
justice does not mean justice to the accuser alone but also
to the accused.
 Another objective is emphasised by the courts - must to
show its abhorrence of crime.
 In PP v Teh Ah Cheng (1976) 2 MLJ 186, the court held
that the public is entitled to be protected and it is not
likely to be protected if lenient sentences are passed.
DETERRENCE

 Aim: the threat of punishment will deter people from

committing crime.
 Two ways:
i) Individual deterrence – individual offender is deterred from
committing a further crime as a result of his unpleasant
experience.
ii) General deterrence – the punishment of offender serves as
an example and a threat to others of what will happen to
them if they commit crimes.
 In PP v The Ah Cheng (1976) 2 MLJ 186 the court observed
that the sentence will deter others who are like-minded from
committing the same crime.
 In PP v Chung Kwong Huah (1981) 1 MLJ 316, it was said:
“Deterrence sentences may very well be of
considerable value where crime is premediated.
Burglars, robbers and users of firearm and weapons may
well be put off by deterrent sentences.”
 In PP v Teh Ah Cheng (1976) 2 MLJ 186, the court
emphasised the important aspect of punishment to
deter the offences involving firearms.
INCAPACITATION

 Looks forward to the goal of crime prevention by the criminals

 Based on the idea that some people pose such serious risk or
further offending that they should be locked away from the
society or otherwise incapacitate
 To lock the criminals to prevent the crimes from being
committed
 Punishment that can be imposed to incapacitate offenders:
1. life imprisonment
2. mandatory minimum sentences
3. longer period of imprisonment

e.g.: other forms of sentences provided in the Malaysian Penal

Code:
* Sec 75
* Sec 295
 REFORMATION/ REHABILITATION

 To treat the underlying causes of the person’s behaviour

 To rehabilitate the criminals
 Mostly those who committed the crimes will be sent away to the
correctional or rehab centre
 Cases:
1. Kenneth John Ball V R (1951) 35 Cr App R 164
2. Teo Siew Peng V PP (1985) 2MLJ 125
3. Lim Yoon Fah V PP (1971) 1 MLJ 37