A failed attempt to radically reduce inter-court sentencing disparities by legislation: Empirical evidence from Poland

Abstract

Sentencing disparities are widely covered in the literature on common law countries. In comparison, the literature on sentencing disparities in civil law countries is less extensive, and the literature is even more scarce in post-communist countries. Nevertheless, sentencing disparities exist in all of these countries. One of the goals of the 2015 criminal law reform in Poland was to limit sentencing disparities. This study compares trial outcomes from before and after the reform. We examine files from district courts in 13 cities in Poland for two offences: drug possession and drunk driving. Our findings demonstrate that there are significant differences in sentencing across courts, even in courts that are situated in the same city. The reform has changed the structure of the punishments but has not radically reduced sentencing disparities.

Sex, Age, Education, Marital Status, Number of Children, and Employment – the Impact of Extralegal Factors on Sentencing Disparities

“…It was important to account for between-court variance because previous work showed considerable disparities in rulings between courts (Mamak et al 2020). In the null models (i.e., without predictors) the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were 16% in driving under the influence cases and 23% in drug possession cases (ICC computed using the latent variable method).…”

“…In drug possession cases the disparities were, indeed, lower after the reform. However, in driving under the influence cases the disparities increased after the reform (see Mamak et al 2020). For this reason, in all models employed in this study we controlled whether the ruling was made before or after the reform.…”

“…Albrecht 1994;Albrecht 1997;Frisch 2017;Herz 2020), in the Netherlands (Johnson, Wingerden, and Nieuwbeerta 2010; van Wingerden, van Wilsem, and Johnson 2016;Wermink et al 2017;Light and Wermink 2021;Komen and Van Schooten 2009), and in Belgium (Bielen, Grajzl, and Marneffe 2021). During the last decade studies have been carried out in Scandinavia (Sandøy, Østhus, and Bretteville-Jensen 2021;Gottschalk and Rundmo 2014;Kruttschnitt and Savolainen 2009;Vestergaard 2004), and in other countries, like the Czech Republic (Drápal 2018;Drápal and Pina-Sánchez 2019), Poland (Mamak et al 2020) and China (cf. Gong, Wang, and Li 2019;Wei and Xiong 2020;Qi 2020).…”

“…The research revealed sentencing disparities among different courts, counties, and districts (cf. Jose Pina-Sánchez, Lightowlers, and Roberts 2017;Drápal 2018;Mamak et al 2020;Franklin and Henry 2020;Fearn 2005;Johnson 2006; Ulmer and Johnson 2017;Hamilton 2017) as well as among individual judges (cf. Anderson, Kling, and Stith 1999;Danziger, Levav, and Avnaim-Pesso 2011;Johnson 2006;Myers 1988;Scott 2010;Steffensmeier and Britt 2001;Calaway, Kinsley, and Wadian 2020;Jose Pina-Sánchez et al 2019).…”

“…The presented studies aimed to verify the impact of extralegal factors, such as sex, age, education, marital status, number of children, and employment. Although sentencing disparities have been revealed in Poland (Mamak et al 2020), their causes have not. Identifying such disparities is a crucial step toward considering the means to reduce them.…”