The Australian justice system combines the maximum length of a prison sentence with the promise of earlier release for good behaviour. It is the job of the parole board to constantly evaluate the progress of prison inmates and often they are granted day leave to commence paid employment to ease their way back into community life. Early release comes with the obligation of supervision by a parole officer and conditions may apply.
Apart from life sentences where the file is marked " never to be released ", all prisoners will walk free when their maximum periods of confinement end. Even people who have committed heinous crimes know that they will walk free when their sentence finally expires and we consider that the foundation stone of our justice system. A new law called a " Continuing Detention Order " or " CDO " turns that on its head.
The state is presently making application to the Supreme Court to validate a CDO on a twenty-six year old New South Wales prisoner under the Terrorism ( High Risk Offenders Act ) of 2017. The sentence the prisoner is serving is not connected with terrorism and it is believed that he was radicalized during his confinement in the prison system.
Alarm has been expressed over the contents of recorded conversations. This prisoner is threatening to bomb the City2Surf fun run, at which the prime minister is usually present, and there have been specific threats to bomb the Holroyd police station in the city's west. The prisoner has been heard gloating about his plans to behead an ordinary Australian citizen as his contribution to jihad.
The people who evaluate prisoners are convinced that this mans intentions are serious and that he will be a menace to society if released. There are limits to the supervision that can be implemented and the only way to protect the public is to keep him behind bars. A CDO would be specific for a nominated period of time and it would be necessary for a new application to have it renewed further.
Unfortunately the CDO is introducing the prospect of indefinite imprisonment which has plagued the methods of oppression used by various totalitarian regimes from which refugees have been escaping to the safety of Australia. There are many countries where offending the state may be rewarded by being locked away without hope of eventual release and usually the reason is not because a crime has been committed but because of political differences of outlook.
A CDO may serve a useful purpose if it is combined with a programme to deradicalize an extreme belief but it must have clearly defined limits. Otherwise it becomes too convenient an instrument to lock away those who are a threat to the holders of power. This has become the chosen way to remove any form of political dissent in many authoritarian regimes.
Eventually, this man must walk free out the prison gate even if he has murder on his mind. The police and the security services will have the task of preventing those plans reaching maturity and their efforts may offend many as a breach of the personal freedoms we hold so dear, but where murderous intent is clearly evident a reduction in personal freedom is the price we have to pay for enhanced security.
This radical may eventually succeed in achieving the murder he craves. Despite intense oversight he may whip out a knife and kill an innocent on the street. Such is the price we have to pay to retain a justice system that has clear limits and obeys the rule of law.
No comments:
Post a Comment