Section I of the essay is a brief discussion of some recurrent preoccupations of criminal justice systems that bear on sentencing. The discussion is designed to explain the mainsprings of the sentencing reform movement of recent years and to provide a sufficient backdrop for discussion of sentencing structures. The focus in Section II is on general issues of constitutional responsibility for sentencing policy, the scope of the principle of judicial independence, and the constitutional status of sentencing commissions. Most recent sentencing reforms in Europe, North America, and Australia have intended to reduce sentencing disparities. Constitutional objections to limitation or elimination of judicial discretion have seldom been successful. The principle of respect for judicial independence to decide cases free from bias, partiality, or undue influence is distinguishable from the principle that the judge's sentencing discretion must be wholly unregulated. Reforms have included mandatory sentencing laws; statutory "fixed point" guidelines; presumptive, strengthened appellate sentence review; and improved information systems. What "works best" necessarily depends on the legal and political situation in each jurisdiction. 99 references