To say that the Criminal Justice System is not consistent in its efforts to uphold justice for individuals would be inaccurate, however there are many factors that limit its efficacy to achieve this. The CJS aims to achieve justice by punishing those who pose a threat to our society while compensating for those who have fallen victim to crime. A just law can be determined by the degree in which it sustains equality, fairness, rights, access and consistency. By using the legal measures such as legal aid, judicial guidelines, bail and remand which it has at its disposal the CJS aims to uphold a just law system but as we will come to discover the CJS is far from flawless.
Australia has no direct right to legal representation and within the …show more content…
It refers to the injustice inducing issue of delay within the criminal system. Delays are when criminal cases take too long to finalise for several reasons such as lack of court management, resources and time. The 1998 Australian Bureau of statistics showed that NSW had the longest delays within Australia, an average of 14 months for criminal cases to be finished. The effects of injustice that this poses can be identified on both the victim and the accused. Victims are subjected to long period of trauma and stress as the person they believe committed a crime against them is still free and not being punished, victims will feel that they are not getting the justice they deserve. Whereas the accused may often be put on remand, injustices occur when accused individuals are put on remand and months later are found to be innocent. The months in remand have impinged upon their rights of freedom and are usually not given any compensation for the time they lost whilst in remand. Former law society president shared his perspective on the matter by stating, “it has a terrible effect on those held in jail awaiting trial”. On the other hand if the accused is given bail until their trial they are essentially given time to re offend. For instance the case of Sargun Ragi (2013) who’s husband was accused of sexual assault, he was granted bail allowing him the opportunity to murder Mrs Ragi. Not only …show more content…
Judicial guidelines and mandatory sentencing fall under the category of sentencing and punishment, an aspect of the criminal justice system which has a purpose to make decisions and impose fair and justly punishments upon criminals. Judicial guidelines are judgements for punishment given to judges for certain crimes whereas mandatory sentencing refers to legislation of parliament which place minimum punishments and sentences for certain crimes. Guideline sentences are found under the Crime (sentencing procedure) Act 1999. This is the CJS way of combating judicial discretion and countering the injustice caused by discretion that was previously discussed. Barry O 'farrell the premier of NSW recently introduced a new mandatory sentencing legislation. This is as a result of the widely covered ‘King hit’ case, formally known as R v Loveridge(2013) which involved the death of Thomas Kelly due to the reckless drunken behaviour of Kieran Loveridge. Under the new ‘one punch’ laws there is an 8 year mandatory minimum sentence for those who are convicted of drug and alcohol affected one-punch assaults. However, whilst this eliminates unjust use of discretion against people it poses the threat of an emergence of other injustices towards individuals. NSW Bar Association president Phillip Boulten SC has said, "It isn 't effective, it 's not
Australia has no direct right to legal representation and within the …show more content…
It refers to the injustice inducing issue of delay within the criminal system. Delays are when criminal cases take too long to finalise for several reasons such as lack of court management, resources and time. The 1998 Australian Bureau of statistics showed that NSW had the longest delays within Australia, an average of 14 months for criminal cases to be finished. The effects of injustice that this poses can be identified on both the victim and the accused. Victims are subjected to long period of trauma and stress as the person they believe committed a crime against them is still free and not being punished, victims will feel that they are not getting the justice they deserve. Whereas the accused may often be put on remand, injustices occur when accused individuals are put on remand and months later are found to be innocent. The months in remand have impinged upon their rights of freedom and are usually not given any compensation for the time they lost whilst in remand. Former law society president shared his perspective on the matter by stating, “it has a terrible effect on those held in jail awaiting trial”. On the other hand if the accused is given bail until their trial they are essentially given time to re offend. For instance the case of Sargun Ragi (2013) who’s husband was accused of sexual assault, he was granted bail allowing him the opportunity to murder Mrs Ragi. Not only …show more content…
Judicial guidelines and mandatory sentencing fall under the category of sentencing and punishment, an aspect of the criminal justice system which has a purpose to make decisions and impose fair and justly punishments upon criminals. Judicial guidelines are judgements for punishment given to judges for certain crimes whereas mandatory sentencing refers to legislation of parliament which place minimum punishments and sentences for certain crimes. Guideline sentences are found under the Crime (sentencing procedure) Act 1999. This is the CJS way of combating judicial discretion and countering the injustice caused by discretion that was previously discussed. Barry O 'farrell the premier of NSW recently introduced a new mandatory sentencing legislation. This is as a result of the widely covered ‘King hit’ case, formally known as R v Loveridge(2013) which involved the death of Thomas Kelly due to the reckless drunken behaviour of Kieran Loveridge. Under the new ‘one punch’ laws there is an 8 year mandatory minimum sentence for those who are convicted of drug and alcohol affected one-punch assaults. However, whilst this eliminates unjust use of discretion against people it poses the threat of an emergence of other injustices towards individuals. NSW Bar Association president Phillip Boulten SC has said, "It isn 't effective, it 's not