Ethnic origin of the victim as an aggravating factor in sentencing sexual offenders

This article examines R v Jamal Muhammed Raheem Ul Nasir, a Court of Appeal case where leave to appeal against a seven-year custodial sentence for sexual offences against children was refused. The appellant argued that his sentence length was excessive because the judge viewed the female victims’ ethnic and religious origin as an aggravating factor. In light of a number of charities’ condemning the judgment, this article evaluates whether the Court of Appeal made the correct decision, particularly in the wider context of sentencing principles. It also considers whether causing shame to a victim and her family can be regarded as an aggravating factor when sentencing sexual offences, and discusses the circumstances where the victim’s ethnic origin should be taken into account.     

Media recognition and access to the presidential primary ballot

Legislatures in nearly a third of the states that conduct presidential preference primaries have given the media a statutory role in deciding who gets on that ballot. In these states, a candidate may qualify for placement on the ballot by being recognized by the media as a serious contender for the office of president. The constitutionality of these statutes has been upheld on the ground that they provide additional access to the ballot. This article argues, however, that the statutes are poor public policy because they contravene democratic principles, they compromise the press in its role as institutional watchdog and they fail to meet the essential goals of the candidate nominating process in a democracy. The article concludes by recommending that these so‐called media recognition statutes be repealed.