The Scope of the Court's Authority in Determining the Appropriate Penalty in Drug Offenses: An Analytical Study in Light of Law No. 7 of 1990 Concerning Narcotics and Psychotropic Substances and its Amendments

Abstract

Modern penal policy requires that punishment be realistically individualized to suit the circumstances of each incident and its perpetrator. To achieve this goal, the legislature has granted the court the power to assess the appropriate penalty for the facts presented, in accordance with specific mechanisms and controls governing the exercise of that power. This study examines the scope of the penalty assessment power granted to the court in drug-related crimes. It aims to identify the extent to which the legislature has left room for judicial individualization of penalties in this type of crime, as well as the circumstances that necessitated limiting the court’s power to assess penalties. The study adopts an inductive analytical approach and reaches several conclusions, the most important of which is that the legislature did not follow a single approach in its reliance on the criteria for individualizing punishment. The scope of the court’s discretionary power is determined either by the legislature’s reliance on these criteria or by ignoring them and leaving the matter to judicial discretion. While the legislator succeeded in granting the court the power to assess penalties according to specific controls, it may also confer inappropriate authority on the court to determine the appropriate penalty in cases where legislation should have provided clearer guidance.