The Prime Minister is happy with the parameters within which judges and magistrates have to give judgments related to traffic accidents where deaths and serious injuries are caused. In comments to the media a few days ago, he made it clear that the government has no intention to increase the penalties given to people who are held responsible for injuries or deaths on the road. The penal code, he said, gives a wide berth to the judiciary in which to operate, and the question that needs to be asked is whether judges and magistrates should be giving punishments closer to the maximum they could inflict, rather than going for more lenient sentences.

It is not the first time that Robert Abela has found a way to criticise the sentencing policy that is applied by the judiciary. In January, his message was for the courts to see whether the judgments being meted out are reflecting the behaviour in society, and if there should be a recalibration to send a message of good order. At the time, Abela had also admitted to have discussed the matter with a magistrate, a revelation that had led to criticism and about which, we learnt this week, there is no official record.

There are two issues here. The first is whether the law as it stands now is punitive enough against offenders who, through negligence and recklessness, cause deaths or serious injuries on our roads. The second is whether the judiciary is applying the law properly to give judgments that could serve as a deterrent and also be just with the victims.

Abela’s reading of it is that the existing parameters are enough and that it is up to the judges and magistrates to apply the law to reflect what society expects. What the PM is implying is that he believes that judges and magistrates should be harsher in their rulings, but he is then not open to legislating for stiffer punishments.

The PM’s words come at a time when on the one hand we had a judgment in which a man was given a suspended sentence and fined €1,200 after running over a woman who was crossing the road on a pedestrian crossing, causing her 80% disability; and on the other hand four men were given an effective jail term and each fined €6.6m after being convicted of defrauding the government in a major cigarette smuggling operation.

In both cases, the law was applied. But it must be admitted that the law, as it is, is incongruent, and both judgments have led to a discussion on whether the punishments allowed by the law are proportionate to the crimes committed.

They are two serious crimes, but there is a major difference. One of them saw the State coffers being robbed of taxes and excise duties, but with no harm caused to anyone; and the other saw a person’s life, and that of her family, changed forever. The penal code as it stands is giving more weight to the State’s losses (meaning money) than a person’s life.

Society is asking for a more appropriate apportioning of punishments.

And this is where, while agreeing with the Prime Minister that the courts should hand out stiffer punishments to offenders who drive irresponsibly, at the same time it must be said that the government would be politically sending a strong message if it were to consider widening the parameters of the law in which the judges and magistrates can operate.

The government has recently worked on a law that increases fines for what are known as traffic contraventions. Penalties for drivers who over-speed, drive through a red light or use a mobile phone while at the wheel have been upped in a clear sign that the government wants to create a more disciplined system on our roads. As traffic problems have multiplied in the past years due to an increase in the population which has inevitably led to many more cars on the road, the government thought it fit to go for harsher punitive measures.

The government should go a step further, building on what it has already done on traffic contraventions by extending its fight against irresponsible driving to cover more serious matters, ones that are life-changing or worse.

Just to give one example, in an interview being carried in this issue, an inspector in the Police Drug Squad says that there is great concern about drivers who are behind the wheel under the influence of drugs (apart from alcohol). Does the government not think that there should be stiffer punishments for people who cause serious injuries or deaths when driving after having consumed substances that can alter their behaviour and affect their control over the vehicle?

We should be giving a higher value to life.