The topic of mandatory minimum sentences and their impact on the justice system frequently appears in IELTS Writing Task 2 exams, particularly in questions about law, crime, and social justice. Based on analysis of past exam questions, this theme has appeared approximately 3-4 times annually since 2019, making it a significant topic for IELTS candidates to prepare for.
Mandatory minimum sentences impact on justice system concept illustration
Analysis of Recent Exam Question
Some people believe that mandatory minimum sentences are essential for reducing crime rates, while others argue that judges should have more flexibility in determining appropriate punishments. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Understanding the Task
- Question type: Discussion + Opinion
- Key elements to address:
- Arguments for mandatory minimum sentences
- Arguments against mandatory minimum sentences
- Personal viewpoint with justification
Sample Essay 1 (Band 8.5)
The debate over whether mandatory minimum sentences effectively deter crime or unnecessarily restrict judicial discretion remains contentious in many societies. While some advocate for these fixed penalties as a crime deterrent, others contend that judges should have greater latitude in sentencing. I believe that while mandatory minimums may serve some purpose, their rigid application often undermines justice rather than enhances it.
Proponents of mandatory minimum sentences argue that these predetermined penalties ensure consistency in criminal justice and act as effective deterrents. When potential offenders know they will face specific minimum sentences for certain crimes, they may be less likely to commit these offenses. Additionally, these standardized sentences eliminate potential bias in judicial decisions and ensure that similar crimes receive similar punishments regardless of the judge or jurisdiction.
However, opponents contend that these inflexible sentencing requirements often result in disproportionate punishments and ignore individual circumstances. For instance, a young first-time offender might receive the same sentence as a habitual criminal due to mandatory minimums, despite significant differences in their situations and potential for rehabilitation. Furthermore, these requirements can lead to overcrowded prisons and strain public resources without necessarily improving public safety.
In my view, while consistency in sentencing is important, the current implementation of mandatory minimums often creates more problems than it solves. A more balanced approach would be to establish sentencing guidelines that provide judges with reasonable ranges while maintaining discretion to consider mitigating factors. This would preserve some standardization while allowing for individualized justice based on specific case circumstances.
Judge making decision in modern courtroom with legal professionals
Sample Essay 2 (Band 6.5)
Mandatory minimum sentences are a big topic in criminal justice today. Some people think they help reduce crime, but others say judges need more freedom to decide punishments. I will discuss both sides and give my opinion.
People who support mandatory minimum sentences say they make punishment more fair. When someone commits a crime, they know exactly what punishment they will get. This helps stop people from doing crimes because they fear the punishment. Also, it means rich and poor people get the same punishment for the same crime.
On the other hand, some people think these sentences are too strict. Sometimes a person might commit a crime for the first time or have special reasons, but the judge must still give them the minimum sentence. This can make the punishment too hard and fill up prisons with people who maybe don’t need to be there.
I think mandatory minimum sentences have both good and bad points. While they make sure everyone gets similar punishments, they sometimes make things unfair. Maybe it would be better to have some guidelines for judges but also let them change the sentence when they need to.
Key Vocabulary
- mandatory (adj) /ˈmændətɔri/ – required by law
- deterrent (n) /dɪˈterənt/ – something that discourages action
- discretion (n) /dɪˈskreʃən/ – freedom to decide
- disproportionate (adj) /ˌdɪsprəˈpɔːʃənət/ – too large or too small in comparison
- rehabilitation (n) /ˌriːəˌbɪlɪˈteɪʃən/ – restoration to normal life
- mitigating factors (n) /ˈmɪtɪgeɪtɪŋ ˈfæktərz/ – circumstances that reduce blame
- jurisdiction (n) /ˌdʒʊrɪsˈdɪkʃən/ – official power to make legal decisions
Conclusion
This topic remains relevant for IELTS candidates as justice system reforms continue to be debated globally. Related topics you might encounter could include:
- Alternative forms of punishment
- Prison overcrowding
- Rehabilitation vs punishment
- Youth justice systems
Practice writing your own essay on this topic and share it in the comments for feedback. Focus on clear structure, balanced arguments, and appropriate use of legal terminology.
