The public has been asked whether courts should be prohibited from handing down prison sentences shorter than a year unless they can provide an appropriate reason.
Since 2010, courts have been prohibited by law from passing a prison sentence shorter than three months "unless the court considers that no other method of dealing with the person is appropriate".
Ministers have stressed the law is "a presumption, not a ban, and it is for the sentencing judge to decide on the most appropriate sentence", but courts must record an appropriate reason for over-ruling the presumption.
The current law was designed to favour community disposals and gave ministers the discretion to extend the number of months.
Ministers now believe the three-month presumption should be extended "in order to further reduce the use of ineffective short-term prison sentences".
The Scottish Government has launched a consultation asking whether it should be extended to six, nine or 12 months - and if there are any offences that should never incur a custodial sentence.
More than 14,000 custodial sentences were handed down in 2013/14 and about two-thirds were for six months or less, figures accompanying the consultation show.
Around 1% of these short sentences were for crimes of violence or a sexual nature - amounting to nearly 100 such offenders, the figures suggest.
A recent survey of all 141 permanent sheriffs found the three-month presumption had "minimal impact on sentencing decisions" as sentences of three months or less were already used "relatively rarely" and custody "was always treated as a last resort".
The sheriffs said they would "continue to impose short sentences where they felt them to be the only appropriate sanction".
However, "sizeable minorities" of sheriffs said the presumption had "either made it more likely that they would give offenders a community rather than a custodial sentence, or that they would impose a longer custodial sentence".
The consultation states: "This would suggest that if we are to uphold the Prison Commission principles on targeting the use of imprisonment (for those committing the most serious offences and those posing a risk of serious harm), there is scope to review, and further reduce, the use of short-term imprisonment."
Reducing short sentences would free up prison officers' time to focus on more serious offenders and also help the rehabilitation of less serious offenders by maintaining the social bonds and job stability that would be disrupted by throwing them in jail, the government said.
It added: "Scotland's incarceration rate (per 100,000 of population) is currently 145, which is one of the highest in western or northern Europe, and more than twice that of any of our Nordic neighbours."
In his foreword to the consultation, Justice Secretary Michael Matheson said: "I would like our criminal justice system to use prison less frequently, and to have an even stronger emphasis on robust community sentences that focus on actively addressing the underlying causes of offending behaviour.
"Imprisonment will always be required for those individuals whose offences are so serious that prison is the only appropriate form of punishment, and for those who pose a risk of serious harm.
"However, use of short-term imprisonment for individuals who do not fall into those categories is not effective - 60% of offenders imprisoned for three months or less are re-convicted within a year.
"Short-term imprisonment disrupts families and communities, and adversely affects employment opportunities and stable housing - the very things that evidence shows support desistence from offending."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article