If we assess the problems with administrating justice and sentencing within a democratic context, then these issues pale into insignificance when compared to those which concern punishment rehabilitation. The reason for this is that any prison sentence or consequence that is passed down within a democratic rule must be dual purpose, and need to provide a delicate balance between legitimate punishment and rehabilitating the perpetrator.
It is this balance which epitomizes a slight weakness within the armory of democracy, as it attempts to serve as many citizens as possible and in a vast number of individual ways. This aspiration is integral to the ideal of democracy, but it can occasionally create a situation where an individual goal or target can fall short of expectations. In terms of rehabilitation, this means that where a prison environment Is too lenient, a criminal is neither encouraged to repent or reform for their misdemeanors.
Can Punishment and Rehabilitation be Carried out Simultaneously?
This raises an interesting point with regards to the separate entities of punishment and rehabilitation, and whether they can be carried out simultaneously. Although they are individual concepts in their own right, they are closely linked in terms of their relationship and relevance to a perpetrator of crime, and any punishment administered must be harsh enough to provoke thought, remorse and ultimately a desire to reform. Where this punishment fails to be efficient,