Politics and Law Exam U2

Natural justice

Understand its principles and significance in legal proceedings

Natural justice is a principle of justice incorporating the rule against bias and the right to a fair hearing.

Due process

Fair processes for determining the truth in a dispute

Natural Justice requires the right to be heard, the right to be treated without bias, and a decision based on relevant evidence.

Burden of Proof

The prosecution must present evidence against the defendant

The defendant is not required to present evidence as they are being accused of a crime.

Presumption of innocence

The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt

This principle prevents wrongful convictions by ensuring the defendant is not obligated to prove their innocence.

Rules of Evidence

Guidelines governing what evidence is admissible in court

Evidence must be relevant, clear, and reliable/true, and cannot be circumstantial, hearsay, or opinion without expert validation.

Strengths of Pre

Trial

Arrests based on reasonable suspicion prevent repeat offending.

Weaknesses of Pre

Trial

Summons that are ignored can delay the trial process.

DPP Hand Out Strengths

Informs defendant of the case and evidence against them

Allows gathering of evidence for cross

examination.

DPP Hand Out Weaknesses

Complex legal knowledge may confuse defendants

Limited scope may exclude critical evidence and misinterpretation can occur.

Trial Strengths

Ensures high

Consistency based on precedent leads to fewer appeals and promotes justice.

Trial Weaknesses

Parties may exploit rules of evidence

Not all evidence may be presented depending on legal representation skill.

Examination in Chief and Cross Examination Strengths

Ensures firsthand evidence is provided

Processes support victims and witnesses, maintaining trial control.

Examination in Chief and Cross Examination Weaknesses

Effectiveness may depend on legal representation

Witness testimony may change over time, especially with delays.

Sentencing Strengths

Attempts to balance justice outcomes through multiple factors

Mitigating and aggravating factors are considered for a broad range of sentences.

Sentencing Weaknesses

Balancing requirements can be challenging

Mandatory sentences may limit context consideration, risking injustice.

Appeals Strengths

Reinforces presumption of innocence through review opportunities

Limited grounds for appeal discourage abuse of process and enhance accountability.

Appeals Weaknesses

Seeking leave to appeal can be restrictive

Appeals increase costs and may cause further delays.

Reoffending of Convicted Criminals

Applying criminal penalties to young children increases likelihood of future trouble

Major risk factors include poverty, homelessness, and parental criminal records.

Raise The Age

Advocates raising the age of criminal responsibility to 14

Aims to transition children out of prison within a year, considering trauma and educational needs.

Decriminalisation

Aims to prevent imprisonment for significantly minor crimes

Seeks to reduce the number of trials and prisoners, allowing for public drinking without harm.

Mandatory sentencing

Mandatory sentencing is the predetermined sentence of a specific crime that cannot be decreased by mitigating factors, only increased by aggravating factors.

Strengths

Mandatory sentencing acts as a deterrent for the public to prevent them from committing crimes as they are fully aware of the minimum punishments imposed.

Consistency

Consistency in the judicial system prevents unfairness due to sentencing and contrasting views of punishment.

Public confidence

Public confidence in the judicial system as they are required to set a minimal sentence through mandatory sentencing laws to prevent the criminal from acquittal without punishment.

Weaknesses

Mandatory sentencing must unfairly impose harsh or unnecessary imprisonment and other punishments for a minor act.

Targeting Indigenous communities

May target Indigenous communities who have a lack of English literacy and legal knowledge/awareness.

Discriminatory impacts

May have discriminatory impacts on homeless people as if they want to drink the only place is in public due to not owning a house.

Case study 1

A 12

Case study 2

An impoverished Indigenous woman stole second

Bias in the judicial system

Bias in the judicial system due to juries and high

Criminal Procedure Amendment (Trial by Judge Alone) Bill 2017

A reform introduced into the WA Parliament in late 2017 that allows the accused to request a trial by a judge alone.

Reasons for the reform

The accused would have increased liberty to be tried by a judge alone; increase transparency in the legal system.

Reduced trial times

The average times of the trials would be reduced, and costs associated with hung juries would also decrease.

Media influence

The accessibility of the media and its influence would make prejudice and influence the juries' decisions, resulting in an unfair trial as opposed to a judge alone.

Reasons against the reform

The reform also reduced transparency in the legal system as participation was removed by the removal of juries.

Judicial resources

Reform requires more judicial resources; more judges.

Judge's ratio decidendi

An additional time would be required to increase the judge's ratio decidendi.

Inquisitorial system strengths

The inquisitorial system utilises an investigative judge to question and call witnesses and to find and present evidence to determine the verdict of the defendant.

Quick trials

This results in a quick trial due to the lack of delays regarding investigations and party interference.

Outreau Trial 2004

Due to the investigative judge's involvement, the verdict led to significant bias with preconceived notions about the guilt of the accused.

Raddad trial

The trial of Omar Raddad had a thorough investigation leading to his conviction based on compelling forensic evidence.

Reduced bias

There is reduced bias as the judge’s active role reduces party bias and allows for quicker resolutions.

Weaknesses of inquisitorial system

Parties have little time to present their own case and influence the verdict of the judge/jury.

Limited defense role

The limited role of the defense meant they had little opportunities to challenge the evidence.

Judicial fallibility

Judicial fallibility showed that a miscarriage of justice can take years to rectify, enhanced by the defense's lack of opportunity to challenge evidence found by the judge during the initial trial.

Influence on judges/juries

The judge or jury can commonly be influenced due to their investigative role in the case.

Jury role

Juries are a group of 12 to 18 people who are enrolled to serve as the impartial adjudicator on a criminal trial with a judge’s guidance.

Selection process

Jurors are randomly selected from the juror pool through the WAEC if they do not have a past criminal record or other impacting influences towards their impartiality.

FAIR ELECTORAL SYSTEM

A fair electoral system is critical to representative democracy. A fair or good electoral system must provide political choice, value all votes equally, create a stable government, and facilitate accountability.

Principles of a fair election

Key principles include universal suffrage, equality of vote, free and fair voting, secret ballot, regular elections, transparency and accountability, and independent electoral bodies.

Universal suffrage

All eligible citizens have the right to vote without discrimination based on race, gender, or social status.

Equality of Vote

Each vote has equal weight; no individual or group has disproportionate influence on the outcome.

Free and fair voting

Voters must have the freedom to make choices without coercion, intimidation, or undue influence; electoral procedures should be transparent and impartial.

Secret Ballot

Voters should cast their votes in secrecy to protect their choices and prevent pressure or retaliation.

Regular elections

Elections should occur at regular intervals to allow citizens to choose their representatives and hold them accountable.

Transparency and accountability

The electoral process should be transparent, with clear rules and procedures; electoral bodies should be held accountable for their conduct.

Independent Electoral Bodies

Institutions responsible for overseeing elections should be independent and impartial to ensure bias

Political Representation

The making of citizens' voices present in public policy

Independent

A member of parliament not affiliated with any political party; in the current 47th Parliament, 11 independents are elected to the House of Representatives, and 3 sit in the Senate.

Reasons for the rise of independents

Dissatisfaction with traditional politics and new communication technologies enable better organization among community groups.

Court case influencing electoral law: GetUp Ltd v Electoral Commissioner (2010)

A case regarding online enrollment to vote in elections.

Court case influencing electoral law: Rowe v Electoral Commissioner (2010)

Challenged amendments reducing the enrollment time under the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918.

Court case influencing electoral law: Roach v Electoral Commissioner (2007)

Allowed prisoners serving a 3

Gender representation in Parliament

47th Parliament has 38% of the House of Representatives and 57% of the Senate as female, reflecting the demographics of Australian society.

Indigenous representation in Parliament

The 47th Parliament has 11 indigenous parliamentarians, totaling 4.8% representation, higher than the 3.3% indigenous population in Australia.

Diverse/multicultural backgrounds in Parliament

23% of Australians claim non

Aims of minor parties

Aim to obtain seats in the Senate to achieve a balance of power; they cannot form government or opposition due to lacking numbers.

Aims of major parties

Represent broad worldviews to win House of Representatives majority and form the government or opposition.

Similarities between minor and major parties

Both aim to contest and win seats in Commonwealth Parliament every three years.

Differences between minor and major parties

Major parties receive more electoral funding due to more first preference votes, giving them a greater chance to fulfill their aims.

Contemporary example of micro parties

The Jacqui Lambie Network (JLN) in the 2022 election.

Individuals' participation in electoral processes

Includes court actions, candidatures, writing submissions, voting, working for electoral commissions, direct contact with MPs, petitioning, and making submissions.

Sectional Pressure groups

Focus on benefits for a particular sector of society or economy; they seek benefits for the group they represent through the electoral process.

Cause

based Pressure groups

Hybrid Pressure groups

Combine features of both cause

Pressure group utilizing electoral pressure: GetUp!

Formed in 2004, focusing on environmental justice, economic fairness, and democratic integrity; successfully unseated Andrew Nikolic in the 2016 election.

GetUp!’s 2016 election campaign

Targeted Andrew Nikolic with a ~$300,000 campaign, resulting in a 10.6% swing against him in the Tasmanian seat of Bass.

Impact of GetUp!

Contributed to a swing of 4.9% against hard

Inequities in participation

While theoretically everyone can participate in a liberal democracy, those with more resources and connections wield greater influence, as seen with GetUp! in 2016.

Electoral System

A mechanism for choosing representatives to occupy elected positions in a legislative assembly.