Fines are by and large the most often imposed sanction; they are relatively simple to manage, since the majority of offenders pay their tickets. Furthermore, in a context where public finances are precarious, fines constitute a positive contribution to state and municipal finances. For instance, in 2007, police officers and City of Montreal parking enforcement officers handed out parking tickets totalling nearly $130M in value (excluding applicable administrative costs). According to the Journal de Montréal, this amounts to 4,950 tickets per day and a daily income of $354,000 for the City of Montreal(1).
We live in a materialistic society in which our peace of mind often depends on one’s financial means; it is therefore quite likely, for example, that the threat of a fine may prove quite effective in convincing people to abide by the speed limit or municipal parking rules.
However, how many of us had the following thought as we “slightly” exceeded the speed limit? “So what if I get caught for speeding? It will only make up for all the times I got away with it!”
When it comes to confronting people who commit offences that are subject to a fine, a quote from Judge Judith Sheindlin of the celebrated and very popular American TV show, Judge Judy, best sums up popular thinking: “Don’t do the crime if you can’t pay the fine.”
That statement is based on simple reasoning; it refers directly to the cost-benefit analysis that any person can perform to guide his or her actions. Hence, an individual will tend to steer clear of certain behaviours, if the perceived risks attached to such behaviours outweigh any advantages. However, if a fine constitutes the main sanction, such reasoning presents an important shortcoming. Let us consider the opposite side of Judge Judy’s statement, “Don’t do the crime if you can’t pay the fine”, from which one could infer that it would be acceptable for a person to keep offending, if he or she could afford to pay the fine and did so appropriately. This raises an interesting social justice issue.
The impact of a fine is directly related to an individual’s ability to pay. While, for some, a $250 fine may simply amount to one or two fewer dinners at a restaurant, it may force others to do agonizing choices, to choose between buying medication or basic food products, etc. Some will have a hard time making ends meet, even if they are given the possibility of paying their fine in instalments and even if they hold a job. As a recent report of the Canadian Association of Food Banks highlighted, in Canada, 14% of the people who must turn to food banks are gainfully employed. Now imagine the situation when tickets have been allowed to accumulate and now require payment.
Fortunately, the Community Work program provides an alternative for offenders in financial difficulty who are unable to pay a fine. Under that scheme, an offender may opt to perform a number of hours of unpaid labour in order to avoid incarceration. This work is performed for a not-for-profit organization.
Judith Sheindlin is a Family Court Judge, an author and a television personality. She was a renowned prosecutor before gaining fame through the Judge Judy program where she hears cases on live TV. In February 2006, she received her star on Hollywood’s Walk of Fame.
This is an essential program, which enables some 15,000 offenders per year to pay off their debts with dignity, thereby avoiding their being further caught up in the downward spiral of poverty. In addition, since they are referred to recognized community resources, these citizens are provided with an opportunity to make contact with new networks of assistance and support with which they may not have been familiar previously. The Community Work program is more than a simple means of paying off a fine; it is also a social integration and empowerment measure.
Ultimately, we need to be leery of all-encompassing statements, such as that attributed to Judge Judy, and we should be concerned with what could be done to avoid inequalities. Some may claim that “crime sometimes pays”, but we should not foster a society within which certain people may be able to afford violating the law. Or have we already reached that stage?
(1) Record de contraventions en 2007 à Montréal, Journal de Montréal, Thursday, February 21, 2008.
