Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/196753 
Year of Publication: 
2019
Series/Report no.: 
IZA Discussion Papers No. 12255
Publisher: 
Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), Bonn
Abstract: 
In this paper, we take a comprehensive and multidisciplinary look at terrorism sentencing decisions over a 17-year period, between September 2001 when the ATA was first conceived of and September 2018. In so doing, we first offer an empirical analysis of the sentences for all terrorism offenses to date, including the total number of sentences, conviction rates, charges, demographics associated with the accused and other factors. We then engage in a qualitative assessment of the sentencing decisions to date. We also investigate the role that section 718.2(a)(v) of the Criminal Code has had on terrorism sentences in Canada and whether it might help to explain the empirical and qualitative shifts we are seeing in terrorism sentencing decisions. Finally, we ask whether there is anything inherent to the legislative and judicial framing of terrorism as a crime, and therefore in its sentencing, that might explain the unique nature of terrorism sentences.
Subjects: 
law and economics
behavioural economics
framing effects
heuristics and biases
JEL: 
K14
K15
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
663.58 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.