HOW CAN THIS TWO-TIER JUSTICE EVER BE FAIR?

EQUALITY before the law has been a cornerstone of British democracy since Magna Carta. yet this sacred principle of our justice system has just been condemned to a slow, painful death by the Sentencing Council for England and Wales, the official body that sets guidelines for judges and magistrates.

For the first time, British courts have been instructed to pass lighter sentences on criminals from ‘deprived’ or ‘ difficult’ backgrounds.

the Council’s absurd new rules list a dozen alleged ‘mitigating factors’ that beaks should consider sympathetically when sentencing socially disadvantaged offenders. these include poverty, low educational attainment, insecure housing and, inevitably, experience of discrimination.

these execrable guidelines – which came into force on Monday despite warnings from Justice Secretary alex Chalk that they are ‘inaccurate’ – are a disgrace.

yes, those at the bottom of society may be more likely to flout the law. But, as Chalk points out, it is ‘patronising’ in the extreme to assume that being hard-up or having housing problems somehow forces people to commit crime – or absolves them of responsibility when they do.

Millions of poorer Britons are honest, decent, hard- working citizens. they don’t ask for special treatment. they will be appalled if others receive it.

and what about the victims of crime, whom the Sentencing Council is tasked with protecting?

Most of them, too, come from the lower end of the socio- economic scale: last year, 40 per cent more crimes were recorded in the poorest areas of Britain compared with the richest.

it is an outrage to sacrifice these blameless people on the altar of political correctness, leaving them to suffer the actions of local ‘deprived’ criminals who have merely been slapped on the wrist and effectively granted a licence to carry on terrorising their estates and communities.

These guidelines don’ t merely discriminate in favour of the poor – they do so against the better- off.

There may be little public sympathy for the middle classes, given the obsession with punishing any form of ‘privilege’. But why should a suburban shoplifter be sentenced more harshly than an inner-city pilferer?

The Sentencing Council itself admits that judges and magistrates were ‘ predominantly negative or neutral’ about the new guidelines. Nevertheless, it decided to press ahead, supposedly to improve ‘transparency and fairness’.

Well, it has certainly made transparent how far the rot has gone into the heart of our justice system. How could two-tier justice ever be ‘fair’?

Anatole France, the 1921 winner of the Nobel Prize for literature, once said: ‘in its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.’ quite so. in practice – witness Russian oligarchs seeking to silence Press intrusion into their murky affairs – the wealthy and powerful can still enjoy some legal advantages. But that is no excuse, m’luds, for scrapping the historic principle of equality before the law.

A difficult background is something to overcome – not to be used as a pathetic excuse for crime.

‘What about the victims of crime?’