Re: Bring manglement to book
This is straying into the criminological discussion about the rehabilitative ideal.
In short, should prison be a deterrent, a punishment, or a means of rehabilitation so that the offender returns to being a productive member of society and doesn't re-offend?
It's not a simple question, and anyone giving a simple answer is giving a wrong one.
Locking people up for vengeance isn't an answer, as it doesn't solve anything.
In some cases, removing someone from society and permanently depriving them of their liberty is the only way to protect wider society (whole life sentences for serial killers, for example). There are still ethical issues with these, as they do not cater for any rehabilitation, you cannot lock someone up for a crime they have not yet committed, or "thought crime", etc.
In other cases, imprisonment is clearly not productive for any involved. Minor crimes committed out of a need to survive and extreme poverty, for example, or crimes committed due to drug addiction. Prison almost always makes life worse for such people, and when they are released, the reasons for committing their crimes are often increased.
And then we have the example of the US prison system, which is basically a loophole for slavery; when slavery was "abolished" in the US, there was the clause "except for punishment" (or equivalent). Prison labour in the US accounts for a significant part of their economy, they have the highest per-capita prison population, and highest absolute prison population of any nation, and the racial make-up of the prison population is wildly distorted compared to the overall ethnic make-up of the country. Draw your own conclusions.
My feeling here, for the people responsible for the Horizon fiasco, is that a custodial sentence of several years would be appropriate, along with confiscation and sale of assets (proceeds going to the treasury, which is the same pool of money that the compensation would come from), and a lifetime ban from holding any board-level position in any business. Maybe they could get jobs as sub-postmasters to make ends meet.
"The people responsible" here is also a pretty wide remit. It should be everyone who knew there was an issue and covered it up, both inside the organisation, and outside, including those at Fujitsu-Siemens, and any politicians who got involved (and I'll bet you there are political connections here). In the end, this is not only corporate manslaughter, fraud, false accounting, and perjury, but there's bound to be an element of corruption, and "conspiracy to commit ..." as well.