Judges have been given power to decide how long convicted murders should spend in jail after the Court of Appeal rejected the minimum period of 15 years as "unconstitutional and void".

Attorney General Kim Wilson is now reviewing the ramifications of the landmark ruling in the Dennis Robinson case, which gives judges scope to set a minimum period above or below 15 years depending on the circumstances of individual cases.

Prior to the ruling, judges would simply order that convicted murderers should spend "life" in jail regardless of the circumstances.

Although they would not generally state it in court, "life" actually meant a minimum 15 years referred to as the "tariff" and set out in law before the murderer could apply to the Parole Board for release. The judge had no power to set the tariff, despite having presided over the trial and having heard all about how the murder was committed.

The issue was recently noted by Puisne Judge Carlisle Greaves when he said he wished to jail the three murderers of Matthew Clarke for at least 50 years, but had no power to do so.

At the time, judges were waiting for the Court of Appeal to explain why, after hearing Robinson's appeal last November, they cut his minimum jail period for the Cooper twins' murder from 15 years to 12.

His co-defendant Kenneth Burgess beat the 20-year-old twins and bludgeoned them with a metal baseball bat in revenge for them allegedly robbing his father. Robinson guarded the door to prevent escape then helped Burgess dispose of their bodies.

The Court of Appeal believed Robinson should have a reduced period behind bars due to the lesser role he played in the crime.

During the appeal, the panel of three appeal judges heard Robinson's lawyer, John Perry QC, argue that the 15-year tariff set by law was unconstitutional, because it was set by Parliament rather than the court. "The deprivation of liberty by a body other than the court is instantly unconstitutional," he told the judges.

Crown Counsel Cindy Clarke said the mandatory 15-year prison term was not unconstitutional and that 15 years was not an excessive sentence for someone convicted of murder.

She argued that a judge should be able to fix a sentence above the mandatory minimum of 15 years, and in that respect the law needed to be reviewed.

The Court of Appeal reduced Robinson's sentence by three years last November without inviting Ms Clarke or Mr. Perry to make submissions on how long he should serve.

The appeals judges delivered their written reasons for the ruling last week. Lawmakers and lawyers are now pondering the implications. The judges noted that under the Criminal Code Act, persons sentenced for crimes have the right to a sentence "proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender".

They agreed with Mr. Perry that the reference to a 15-year minimum period before a murderer can apply for parole is unconstitutional and void.

They also stated that setting sentences in murder cases is primarily a matter for the trial judge.

And they ruled that when passing a sentence of life imprisonment, the trial judge is required to determine what the minimum period should be.

The ruling brings Bermuda in line with England, where since 2003 it has been judges who set the period, not Parliament.

However, in England there are also guidelines set by Parliament that judges must heed in terms of what sentence is appropriate depending on the circumstances of individual murders.

These include factors such as whether a weapon was used and whether the murderer carried out the killing, like Burgess, or was guilty of assisting in the crime, like Robinson.

Although it is unclear whether the Crown will appeal the ruling in the Robinson case, it could mean fresh legislation is required to guide Bermuda judges on appropriate tariffs for murderers.

Attorney General Kim Wilson told The Royal Gazette this week: "I have in fact reviewed the Robinson decision and am currently reviewing the legal ramifications. If it is deemed necessary to make any legislative amendments, those too will be considered."

She noted that in future, persons who appeal against their murder convictions and sentences may include the Robinson ruling when making their arguments to the Court of Appeal.

The ruling also opens the way for the Crown to appeal to increase the amount of time a murderer has to serve before they can apply for parole.

Director of Public Prosecutions Rory Field said: "We are reviewing the impact of the reasons given by the Court of Appeal."