Section: 3.8.4
There is a natural tendency by Governments, in their haste to be seen to solve problems, to deal with them in an ad hoc manner. Problems, when they emerge, tend to be presented as isolated dilemmas with simple solutions, and Governments are often tempted to solve them by passing laws forbidding certain behaviour. This is often done without any real research and without any regard to the ability of the law enforcement system, including the Police, the courts and the prisons, to cope with the burden of extra enforcement. Passage of such a law usually, however, gives the Minister responsible a sense of accomplishment, leaves the bureaucracy in control, and gives the public an impression that the Government is alert and active. The media rarely examines the issues in any depth, often endorsing the view that problems have simple solutions which can be applied by quick legislation.When problems are not simple, the passage of a badly drafted law, especially if the resources are not available to enforce it, simply compounds the problem as well as further taxing the resources of the system. When the pressure is on, and the problem become impossible to ignore, more ad hoc legislation is passed.
Those who conduct reviews of the law should not only present recommendations to the legislature, but should also present any rational arguments against the recommended course of action. If this is done, Cabinet and Parliament will have an objective basis for proper critical assessment of the proposals. Reform affecting the administration of criminal justice, in particular, is fundamentally different from other social or economic reforms which usually involve merely the raising, spending and distribution of money. The administration of criminal justice should therefore surmount party political a fundamental dependence on the criminal justice system. All in the Parliament to identify objectives and grant the resources and powers to attain them barriers. All parties share must help, in good faith, In the field of criminal justice, identifying the options and understanding their merits and drawbacks is technical and difficult. Individual politicians, with their limited time, resources and training, and even party machines cannot by themselves adequately analyze complex proposed legislation. This is even more the case when the legislation is presented in an urgent reactive way to the Parliament.
Since this Inquiry began, the public service, superannuation and retirement benefits, the Police, the prisons and public accounts have all been the subject of significant legislative attention. The criminal law, the powers of investigation of criminal offences and the law of evidence have all been variously added to or changed. Some of this activity provides excellent examples of the shortcomings in the present approach to criminal justice, and demonstrates the need for on-going review by an independent specialist agency, such as that recommended in this report. Such a body is a necessity if crime is to be addressed properly. In general, the significance of some of the initiatives undertaken in 1989 underline the need to seek out opposing points of view when considering delicate and difficult reforms to the criminal law. The Parliament must identify objectives and provide (or attract) the resources to attain them. In that, it must be given objective advice. Recommendations elsewhere in this report for the presentation of competing viewpoints by a permanent independent agency address that need.Enactments must be considered for their impacts upon an whole structure, particularly impact on the administration of criminal justice.
Bills introduced to Parliament could be accompanied by an ‘impact statement’ which addresses and details the financial and other practical considerations which would be associated with the bills’ implementations.The laws which remain or which are passed after this report must reflect and identify social need and be aimed to meet realistic objectives. When enacted, they must be attended by the means of enforcing them properly. It is of the greatest concern that the de facto power of the bureaucrats to filter information and argument when advising their Ministers be removed. If reform, and for that matter, democracy, is to work, the administrators should not have the last word on what is put to the Parliament. Recommendations in this report for the presentation of competing viewpoints by a permanent independent agency address the stated needs. It is vital that an ongoing mechanism for research and reform of the criminal law and the administration of criminal justice be developed, and later in this report, the nature and type of that mechanism is discussed.
There is a natural tendency by Governments, in their haste to be seen to solve problems, to deal with them in an ad hoc manner. Problems, when they emerge, tend to be presented as isolated dilemmas with simple solutions, and Governments are often tempted to solve them by passing laws forbidding certain behaviour. This is often done without any real research and without any regard to the ability of the law enforcement system, including the Police, the courts and the prisons, to cope with the burden of extra enforcement. Passage of such a law usually, however, gives the Minister responsible a sense of accomplishment, leaves the bureaucracy in control, and gives the public an impression that the Government is alert and active. The media rarely examines the issues in any depth, often endorsing the view that problems have simple solutions which can be applied by quick legislation.When problems are not simple, the passage of a badly drafted law, especially if the resources are not available to enforce it, simply compounds the problem as well as further taxing the resources of the system. When the pressure is on, and the problem become impossible to ignore, more ad hoc legislation is passed.
Those who conduct reviews of the law should not only present recommendations to the legislature, but should also present any rational arguments against the recommended course of action. If this is done, Cabinet and Parliament will have an objective basis for proper critical assessment of the proposals. Reform affecting the administration of criminal justice, in particular, is fundamentally different from other social or economic reforms which usually involve merely the raising, spending and distribution of money. The administration of criminal justice should therefore surmount party political a fundamental dependence on the criminal justice system. All in the Parliament to identify objectives and grant the resources and powers to attain them barriers. All parties share must help, in good faith, In the field of criminal justice, identifying the options and understanding their merits and drawbacks is technical and difficult. Individual politicians, with their limited time, resources and training, and even party machines cannot by themselves adequately analyze complex proposed legislation. This is even more the case when the legislation is presented in an urgent reactive way to the Parliament.
Since this Inquiry began, the public service, superannuation and retirement benefits, the Police, the prisons and public accounts have all been the subject of significant legislative attention. The criminal law, the powers of investigation of criminal offences and the law of evidence have all been variously added to or changed. Some of this activity provides excellent examples of the shortcomings in the present approach to criminal justice, and demonstrates the need for on-going review by an independent specialist agency, such as that recommended in this report. Such a body is a necessity if crime is to be addressed properly. In general, the significance of some of the initiatives undertaken in 1989 underline the need to seek out opposing points of view when considering delicate and difficult reforms to the criminal law. The Parliament must identify objectives and provide (or attract) the resources to attain them. In that, it must be given objective advice. Recommendations elsewhere in this report for the presentation of competing viewpoints by a permanent independent agency address that need.Enactments must be considered for their impacts upon an whole structure, particularly impact on the administration of criminal justice.
Bills introduced to Parliament could be accompanied by an ‘impact statement’ which addresses and details the financial and other practical considerations which would be associated with the bills’ implementations.The laws which remain or which are passed after this report must reflect and identify social need and be aimed to meet realistic objectives. When enacted, they must be attended by the means of enforcing them properly. It is of the greatest concern that the de facto power of the bureaucrats to filter information and argument when advising their Ministers be removed. If reform, and for that matter, democracy, is to work, the administrators should not have the last word on what is put to the Parliament. Recommendations in this report for the presentation of competing viewpoints by a permanent independent agency address the stated needs. It is vital that an ongoing mechanism for research and reform of the criminal law and the administration of criminal justice be developed, and later in this report, the nature and type of that mechanism is discussed.
No comments:
Post a Comment