The objectives of this research were to study the concept of applying the philosophy of criminology to sentencing and to draw a conclusion in connection with its application to offenders, including the examination of judges' opinions on such conclu- sions. The Scope of the study was limited to case study of criminals by nature and crimi- nals by mistake. The research methods were mainly documentary research and in-depth interviews. The conclusion was developed by the synthesis of the results, derived from such methods. Further, the judges were asked for opinions on that was composed of 1,249 judges who have been in the judicial positions for over 10 years. Questionaires were employed as the tool to gather data from all samples, without choosing at random. The results which are presented as a percentage were used to support the extent to which the judges agreed on the mentioned conclusion.
or not they agreed on it. In this connection, the sample on about whether
The research findings revealed that sentencing should be appropriate for both the offence and the offender. The major elements of sentencing were (1) the facts of the case and (2) the theoretical principles. The facts of the case are composed of the circumstances of the case and the offender's history. The major theoretical principles are the retribution, prevention, rehabilitation and social protection theories. As for the way to apply the punishment theories to sentencing, the findings recommended mixed applications by putting emphasis on one of them and taking others as the supplements. The retribution theory should be mainly applied to the case of serious offences, while the rehabilitation theory should be mainly applied to the case of less serious ones. Furthermore, the prevention theory should be mainly applied to the recidivists. When considering their applications to each type of offenders, who are criminals by nature and criminals by mistake, the findings suggested different ways of application. For example, the offenders who commit serious offences, in principle, should be sentenced to a harsh penalty, while ones who commit less serious offences should be sentenced to a light penalty, being in proportion to the offences, except for the case of provoked offenders where the penalty may not be imposed in proportion to the offences. Finally, the recidivists or repetitious offenders, in principle, should be sentenced to an especially harsh or the harshest penalty, as the case may be.
The recommendations from this research were that sentencing should con- sider applying major and additional measures to be appropriate for both the offence and each individual offender. In this regard, the judges should always take into account the facts of the case and the punishment theories in their exercise of discretion on sentencing, so that the sentencing may be more effective and may result in the effective prevention of crimes.