Criminal justice system in Australia
Exploring such factors, it would be instrumental to assert that, the Australias is adversarial in nature, therefore, I beg to differ with the statement, the criminal justice system in Australia is about as fair and effective as we have any right to expect, and this is due to the fact that, in Australia there are dissimilar procedures and approaches regarding criminal measures. For instance, the aspect of right to silence in criminal suits has been faced with a number of challenges. This is generally attributed to the fact that, relying on this constitutional right the defense has more than often delayed and prolonged the criminal deliberations by challenging or disputing almost every point presented rather than concentrate on the real and hard facts. In essence, the legal structure cannot manage to pay for the resultant drain on the limited resources. Also, the populace cannot afford the expenses accrued when privately funded accused employ such methods and generate mega-trials of unreasonable ratio (Wyngaert,1993).
Another major factor, which has equally impacted negatively on the nature of the CJS, has been cited as delay, this has eroded the manner by which the CJS operations are being carried and executed, translating, the CJS takes quite a long time before concluding cases. Though, there are those people who think criminal justice system in Australia is about as fair and effective as we have any right to expect, delays in the CJS have resulted in the suffering of individuals waiting for the offender to be punished, and this has resulted in instances of witnesses forgetting vital and crucial information pertinent to the case(s). Principally, not many people can afford to hire legal experts, and this has established that, CJS system can be painful and costly
In essence, the Australias CJS has been overtime defined as adversarial, though its advantages and disadvantages have equally been traditionally debated, it would be pivotal to assert that, the efficiency of this system is typically compromised in as far as efficiency and fairness are concerned. Hence, it is from such observation that, it has been compared with the inquisitorial system. Though, the comparison may look flawed and useless, the CJS remains shackled within the confines of unreliability. World over, the adversarial system in criminal proceedings tends to be characterized by a soaring level of enthusiast conduct, judicial submissiveness including reliance on integrity of lawyers, equally, this has also been evidenced within the Australias CJS, where the involved parties are held responsible in identifying the issues disputed as well as the evidence to be adduced. To illustrate this, it would be important to revisit such previous cases as Dietrich v the Queen where the high court highlighted the need to have adequate legal representation. This indicated that, the aspects of inequalities within the CJS are yet to be addressed (Vogler, 2005).
Therefore, no matter how the populace accepts that the CJS is effective, it is debatable that, its effectiveness is arguably challengeable. This can be attributed to the fact that, severe costs, and the failure to get access to legal help, a number of people are opting to stand for themselves. To recompense for the escalating quantity of self represented indicts, in particular in sexual attacks cases, the sexual offence act 2003, has been found o be preventing self represented indict from questioning victims. According to legal experts, the government is said to have introduced this scope as a measure of protecting the victims from unfair trial but it has considerably failed.
Therefore, I am of opinion that, in order for the Australias CJS to be helpful for both individuals and the public, it must employ its assets or resources competently and not dissipate them. For Instance, the CJS has alarmingly limited funds obtainable, hence a substantial ratio of these resources are injected towards the courts, police, and corrective services which involves exposure, conviction and sentence (Trechsel,2005). Therefore, if the CJS can be said to be effective and executing its mandate proficiently as well as utilizing its resources to the unsurpassed, then the consequences would be Decreased crime rates Less recidivism Enhanced convictions and Fewer young people consigning to crimes.
Thus, looking at such situation, I find it hard to agree that, the criminal justice system in Australia is about as fair and effective as we have any right to expect. On a legal aspect, it is commonly held that, the CJS would be more punctual and effective in chastisements if it concentrated on deterrence, halting the felony before it is executed.
Generally, I am convinced that, public confidence is crucial to the elaborate functions and operations CJS in Australia (Bassiouni, 1982). This system fundamentally relies on the total involvement of victims as well as the members of the public who plays such major roles as being witnesses and also as jurors. However, low levels of civil confidence have lead to disrespect and dissatisfaction with the CJS in Australia today. This discontent have been gradually developing since the last few decades, hence those mandated with overseeing
The administration and execution of CJS have not done much to change the situation. Therefore, by examining this statement in broader context, it is apparent that public confidence has greatly decreased towards the fundamental segments of the system which includes courts, police as well as the correction centers. In principal, it has been established that, the Australians views each and every arm of the CJS separately. Hence, this has resulted in an eroded attitude towards the entire set up of the CJS. As a result, arguing that the criminal justice system in Australia is about as fair and effective as we have any right to expect cannot be accepted in part or whole.
According to Terrill (2003) who presented a global comparison of confidence and reliability levels in the CJS with Australians, established that, the CJS is unfavorably viewed by the populace in as far as execution of their duties are concerned. Thus, the essence of fair and effective services can be said to be practically. For instance, a recent research conducted by Donnelly,et al (2005) investigated the public faith in regard to Criminal Justice System in Australia, it emerged that, most of the people do not believe that the entire system is fair or effective. This attitude is being attributed to the fact that, most of the people employed within the CJS are either corrupt or incompetent, another factor that has been highly cited involves lack of sufficient resources to carry out proper investigation or corrections, and hence, this has seen a significant number of the victims being denied a fair trial.
The criminal justice system in Australia cannot be said to be as fair and effective as we have any right to expect it to be. Therefore, it would be pivotal for the government to create performance indicators which would be employed to Establish an equity checking procedures for the CJS to appraise parity treatment, as well as establish the societys acuity of the CJS and recognize any regions of concern via reviews such as the Public Attitudes Survey, among other diverse issues. Another aim that the government has to consider is to make the CJS as open, all comprehensive and open as possible, and equally endorse confidence in the execution and administration of justice. By do so, the Australias CJS can be said to be fair and effective, however, in its current nature, and the citizens are not yet convinced how the CJS operations can be fair or effective.
It should be noted that, diverse CJS parameters have significantly failed to impact positively on the society, translating to a situation where, the use of penalties have failed to improve or enhance the image of the CJS and this significantly contributed to the less efficient spending of CJS available resources. More, where the CJS have opted to employ imprisonment to reduce the instances of crime, diverse issues have emerged challenging the very nature and competence of the CJS. Therefore, it would be instrumental to assert that, the CJS is not fair or effective.
Remedy
I am of opinion that, the Australias criminal justice system can be made to be fair and effective, if the community as well as the government accept to cooperate. It is instrumental to underline the fact that, there are diverse arms of the system that are directly linked with the manner the entire system operates. Therefore, by examining such arms such as the police service as well as the courts, it would be vital, and this could help in streamlining the execution of their duties hence providing fair services as well as being efficient.
Prosecutorial and Judicial response
Having a skilled and a competent prosecutorial agents and an informed judiciary would help to create an effective CJS in response to ineffective system. It should be realized that, for over two decades the Australians have complained of having ineffective and unfair criminal justice. So having an aggressive and operational system would aid in enforcing the law and more so creating an environment where no one stands a chance of being denied justice. Hence, for the CJS to be effective, judges as well as prosecutors must first and foremost understand the legal needs of the immediate communities they are serving. Therefore, having the rudimental understanding of the applicable legal structures, including both commitments incurred through endorsement of international treaties and applicable national laws (Tonry, et al, 2001).
The prosecutors and judges do play a significant role pertaining to the manner the courts dispenses the justice, however, reflecting on the way the Australians view the judges as well as the prosecutors, it would be impossible to agree that the criminal justice system in Australia is about as fair and effective as we have any right to expect. In principal, the rights of the entire community have to be balanced against the constitutional rights of an individual. Therefore, the changing social values requires or rather calls for a competent and effective CJS, thus, as pertains to the case in Australia, the government have to invest more in the system so as to improve the enforceability and accessibility of legal systems and this would help in assuring the public the CJS is being fair and efficient.
Another, major area that has totally soiled the entire images of CJS can be said to be the police department. It would be pivotal to assert that, the other sections of the CJS significantly depend on the complete enforcement of law by the police who are complimented by both the courts and correctional centers. Therefore, where the police force including its subsequent arms such as the criminal investigation department fails to considerably deliver or provide the necessary legal aid as granted to them under the Australian constitution, it is typically seen that, the police have abdicated their responsibilities. Thus, exploring such observation, it would crucial to posit that, the scope of having a fair and effective Criminal Justice System becomes difficult to implement. Consider the fact that, community policing presents the image of the CJS, where the essence of negligence are cited, the CJS receives the ugly award of being treated with suspicion.
Therefore, by exploring the concepts of public trust in regard to CJS it would be crucial to examine the role of the police in relation to the tarnished image of the Australian CJS. Too, it would be instrumental to reflect the fact that, the broad concepts of the CJS is to make sure the community adheres to the accepted legal statutes. However, ignorance, corruption and negligence have massively contributed to the manner the CJS functions are being executed either directly or indirectly. Taking position on this whole observation, principally, I posit that, the Australian CJS cannot be said to be fair or effective. Note that, as a member of commonwealth community, its civil legislations falls within the broader structure of English law, translating the manner by which the courts, correctional centers including the police forces behave falls short of the accepted legal and ethical standards.
On ethical grounds, the Australian CJS has been accused of dire abuse of human rights through acts of racism, intimidation as well as lack of goodwill towards the helpless victims. This has more than often resulted in a compromised system, where abuse, greed and sadism have propagated a fertile ground for corruption and eventually opening a door for favorism as well as nepotism. Tonry (2001) found that, these behaviors have negatively impacted on the entire system, translating, justice cannot be found within the avenues of the Australias CJS without money or political connections. More so, Wyngaert (1993) established that, lack of proper regulations have resulted in low morale among diverse members of the CJS as well as lack of adequate training and resources needed to sustain a profound CJS.
Therefore, I am of opinion that, for the Australias CJS to be fair and effective, the government have to seek alternative means of handling diverse ethical and legal issues that the CJS have failed to cater for. It should be noted that, Australia is a nation that is known for its multicultural intergration, however, the CJS has been accused of entertaining the aspects of tribalism as well as ethnicity in as far as the execution of justice is concerned. It is vital to assert that, some communities are treated as aliens, whereas there are some complainants who are denied justice because of their economic and social status. This trend has resulted in a more fragile, unpredictable and compromised system.
However, if the entire Australian criminal justice can be overhauled through proper training of the CJS personnel as well as injecting the much needed resources, within the commonwealth community, Australia stands a chance of being a global center of fair and effective CJS. All in all, I am convinced that, if the government can accept to employ professionals in all arms allied to the CJS, perhaps, the current community dissatisfaction with the CJS could be contained. This is due to the fact that, diverse criminal justice experts would in one way or the other attempt to instill discipline, as well as employ effective standards regarding the broad concepts of the CJS and this would instrumentally change the Australias CJS landscape in relation to the community as well as the execution of justice in fair trial, senticing, remanding including the moral corrections in correctional centers.
Conclusion
Examining the Australias criminal justice in more critical manner, I am persuaded to assert that, the police force, courts as well as correctional centers have a profound duty of serving the Australians fairly and effectively without employing procrastination tactics in order to deny the injured the justice they seek. Thus, it is only through government intervention and the communal collaboration with the authority that can assist in preparing the ground for fair and effective criminal justice system
Without total participation of the government, the CJS will continue to remain unfair and incompetent in as far as it is concerned with the matters pertaining to the aspects of justice. Also, it would be unfair to assume that the Australias CJS is fair and effective, exploring the Australias case in comparison with the diverse members of EU in regard to EU legal structure, Australia lacks the capacity to provide fair and effective services in relation to criminal justice, despite its strong economic legislations under its Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). Thus, under EC laws and in particular the EU Regulation 12003 which inclusively deals with diverse scopes of legal injuries and remedies, Australia has to borrow from either the UK or Germany in order to have a strong but fair and effective CJS. Therefore, I beg to differ with the statement.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment