People typically celebrate happy events in their lives with a bottle of bubbly or two. Maybe a party, if they happen to be the ostentatious sort.

Not so some political parties. The accepted method in this case seems to be to celebrate by letting criminals and low-lifes loose on our streets. Except for paedophiles, of course, which makes it all right.

This is the only way I can interpret the decision to celebrate the change in government by declaring an amnesty for prisoners. Of course, more details are awaited.

I was under the impression that electoral amnesties are a thing of the past. After all, we don’t really want to pass on the message that the best time to commit a crime is some months pre-election now, do we? Or some time before a papal visit, for that matter.

I know that prison time is not supposed to be an issue of society taking revenge on law-breakers. I also know that prison time is meant to be a way of ‘re-programming’ said law-breakers, so to speak, transforming them into productive members of society (yeah, right).

And I am definitely not advocating a wholesale, barbaric, let’s-lock-everyone-up approach to justice. But I am also most definitely against the idea of anyone paying less than their dues just because the country underwent a change in government. Where is the ethical justification in that?

And equally importantly, what are the victims of those who benefit from said amnesty supposed to make of it? Once society has decided to abide by the prison model of law-keeping, let us at least be constant.

Also, what’s with the “paedophiles will not get ten minutes of it”? Of course, I abhor paedophilia with all my being. I feel I should add this, lest some samaritan chooses to misunderstand.

However, I don’t harbour particularly fond feelings towards rapists either. Or cold-bloodied killers, for that matter. Hell, I’m even inclined to look at petty thieves with a nasty eye, if I’m having a bad day.

The point I’m trying to make here is, where does one draw the line when the decision to let criminals partially off the hook is made without a good reason to back it up?

The list of good reasons for individual amnesties includes exemplary behaviour, extreme personal circumstances and collaboration with the state (albeit with a lot of caveats).

The list of good reasons for group amnesties includes definite knowledge that an asteroid is going to end the world as we know it in a month’s time. Yes, I’m being facetious.

You will notice that “a change in government” features nowhere on either list.