Law Reform enigma !

Punishment for crime has been steadily retreating as our legal system becomes more " humane ".    The past usual outcome for murder involved the culprit facing execution and this was the sentence carried out on 114 Australians in the first half of the twentieth century.   Ronald Ryan was the last man executed in Australia as late as 1967.

A Law Reform Commission report has just been handed down by Attorney General Greg Smith and it contains some suggestions that will horrify those who consider our present sentencing laws too lax.   One of these invites comment on the proposal to introduce the prospect of parole for those given a " life " sentence.   It would virtually do away with the notion of " never to be released " as an option for a judge sentencing a particularly vicious crime.

At present, a prisoner applying for parole must wait a full twelve months before a fresh application can be made if that application is refused.   This makes absolutely no sense - and those nearing the end of their custodial sentence need to be pre-conditioned for release into the community.   Flexibility is a better option for those tasked with making such decisions.

There is a curious suggestion about making " Aboriginality " an issue to be taken into account when sentencing options are considered.   The ratio of Aboriginal people in prison is certainly a troubling issue, but surely we are not about to see Aboriginality as an automatic " discount " on time to be served ?

This " Law Reform review " is really a carefully crafted economic document tasked with bringing prison costs under control.    In every past decade, the time felons serve in prison has been decreasing and yet we need more prisons to accommodate the criminals in our ever growing population - and that is putting pressure on the budget.

The " Economic Rationalists " are looking at ways to make the present prison system adequate for the task by decreasing the time  criminals spend under lock and key.   Home detention is one option likely to increase.   The " Bean Counters " will probably opt for decriminalizing a wider drug spectrum and the option of managing those convicted of lesser crimes by the use of " location bracelets " may get wider use.

What seems to have got lost - is the original intention of prison sentencing.   The object to be achieved - was supposed to be rehabilitation - but this has morphed into the " University of Crime " !        So many first offenders leave prison with the networking skills and contacts - and the wide knowledge to advance their earning skills in new criminal pursuits.

We certainly need to keep reviewing the system to achieve a better outcome, but there is a real danger that watering down the penalties will create precedents that will allow clever criminal lawyers to present a compelling case for reductions that put the public at risk.

It would be a sad day if law changes ever resulted in Martin Bryant, Ivan Milat  or Malcolm Naden ever walking the streets as free men !