It`s often shouted from legal and political rooftops that the justice system is a development of the common law as if that is explanation enough for its supposed benefit to society. A similar claim based on the history of England is that we have a superior form of governance owing to our not having a written constitution.
I would suppose that clarity and accessible civil codes are written and comprehensive giving citizens, lawyers and judges clear rules in one coherent document. The constitution of the United States is a fine example and a philosophical triumph considering the times when it was created. Common law relies on precedent which can be fragmented, complex and difficult for non-specialists to understand. Codified law provides consistent application across cases reducing judicial discretion whereas common law depends on judicial interpretation leading to variable outcomes and possible inconsistency between jurisdictions. Indeed "leftie judges" and their influence in immigration tribunals has become a political hot potato. Common law gives judges law making power which critics see as undemocratic or lacking accountability. Common law evolves case by case making it slow, costly and dependent on litigation to establish principles. In practice this means judges can temper punishment or adapt doctrines to new situations. From Magna Carta to the present day it is argued that common law is centred around the rights of the individual as opposed to those of the nation state. Trial by jury and an adversarial system rather than an inquisitorial judicial process are often cited as the prime reasons for the differences between the English derived system and that of those countries which apply a platform based upon the Napoleonic Code.
As a former presiding magistrate I have experienced situations where truth and justice have seemed to be in opposition to due process. I do not think it is controversial to opine that there are occasions where the quality and ability of advocates pleading in magistrates courts is lacking, such situations leading to the possibility of the guilty being acquitted or horror of horrors the innocent being found guilty. With the risk of such miscarriages of justice being on the horizon I have intervened in court and become more inquisitorial than the legal advisor at the court review would have deemed appropriate. Usually in such matters my colleagues agreed with my interventions. Who is to argue that if such interventions were more frequent there might be fewer decisions at the crown court going to appeal?
With tens of thousands of cases before magistrates every week below are just a few which caught my eye today.
If ever there was a case which demonstrated the inability of our judicial system to cater for drug induced criminality this must surely be it. A life ruined and with the knowledge that the sentencing options are totally inadequate to rehabilitate the offender the costs to her and society should be a spur to innovation. I have long advocated that a model workhouse fit for this century would be of benefit to offenders and our society. When all else has failed there must be innovation. For further thoughts please insert "Bring back the workhouse" in the search box.
Nine years ago I commented on the lack of public lavatories in Chester and York. [Type "Piss up in Chester and York" in the search box for access]. Whether this offender would have benefitted from improved provision of public lavatories is a moot point but there is no doubt that such availability is a limited resource. With pubs often catering for a young clientele it might be that those in need of such facilities are inhibited from pursuing their physiological needs. By most measures of availability, cleanliness, technology, accessibility and design Japan has the best and most widely available public lavatories in the world. It is nothing short of a national disgrace that the negative of all the preceding adjectives describes the position in Britain.
As a former presiding magistrate I have experienced situations where truth and justice have seemed to be in opposition to due process. I do not think it is controversial to opine that there are occasions where the quality and ability of advocates pleading in magistrates courts is lacking, such situations leading to the possibility of the guilty being acquitted or horror of horrors the innocent being found guilty. With the risk of such miscarriages of justice being on the horizon I have intervened in court and become more inquisitorial than the legal advisor at the court review would have deemed appropriate. Usually in such matters my colleagues agreed with my interventions. Who is to argue that if such interventions were more frequent there might be fewer decisions at the crown court going to appeal?
With tens of thousands of cases before magistrates every week below are just a few which caught my eye today.
If ever there was a case which demonstrated the inability of our judicial system to cater for drug induced criminality this must surely be it. A life ruined and with the knowledge that the sentencing options are totally inadequate to rehabilitate the offender the costs to her and society should be a spur to innovation. I have long advocated that a model workhouse fit for this century would be of benefit to offenders and our society. When all else has failed there must be innovation. For further thoughts please insert "Bring back the workhouse" in the search box.
Nine years ago I commented on the lack of public lavatories in Chester and York. [Type "Piss up in Chester and York" in the search box for access]. Whether this offender would have benefitted from improved provision of public lavatories is a moot point but there is no doubt that such availability is a limited resource. With pubs often catering for a young clientele it might be that those in need of such facilities are inhibited from pursuing their physiological needs. By most measures of availability, cleanliness, technology, accessibility and design Japan has the best and most widely available public lavatories in the world. It is nothing short of a national disgrace that the negative of all the preceding adjectives describes the position in Britain.
I have long been against the ever increasing use of what I term displacement orders whereby a usually prolific offender is prohibited from certain geographical locations and therefore his law breaking becomes a matter for another county or police jurisdiction. Such orders are issued under various powers by police or courts. It used to be ASBOs; now there are PSPO breaches/dispersals, Section 34/35 dispersals, Community Protection Notices (CPNs), Criminal Behaviour Orders (CBOs), Civil injunctions/ASBIs, closure orders) and others. There is no doubt that with increasing police involvement in so called non hate crime and/or accusations of causing offence that the law abiding citizen is much more likely than s/he was 25 years in being a statistic in the police national computer.
A recent interesting case at Swansea crown court will be of particular instruction to magistrates. The warning is that it is precarious for one bench to assure a witness or defendant that another bench will take a pre determined or particular course of action at a subsequent sitting.
In 15 months this government is now on its second Justice Secretary. The Tories had 10 such ministers between 2010 and 2024. Is it any wonder that justice in this country is just a merry go round or a game of musical chairs?
No comments:
Post a Comment