Good behaviour bond

Last updated

In the Australian legal system, a good behaviour bond is a type of non-custodial sentence which involves the condition of the offender's "good behaviour" for a set period. [1] The condition of "good behaviour" primarily requires the offender to obey the law, but may also include additional probation officer supervision, mandatory medical treatment or participation in rehabilitation, counselling and intervention programs. [2] These imposed conditions are determined by state legislation and at the magistrate's discretion. [2] A good behaviour bond may be established with or without a recorded legal conviction for the offence. [3] The specific conditions which constitute a good behaviour bond, as well as the consequences for breaching them, vary under each Australian state or territory's legislation, but overall are used most commonly for first-time and juvenile offenders. [3]

Contents

Implementation in Australian states & territories

New South Wales

The Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) specifies the requirements of a good behaviour bond in New South Wales. [2] Section 101(1)(a) declares the eradication of the courts' power to impose a "recognisance to be of good behaviour". The official Hansard record of 30 November 1999 clarifies that both "bond" and "recognisance" are terms which entail "the release of an offender upon probation", thus Section 101 intends to clarify terminology use. [4] The Crimes(Sentencing Procedure)Act states that a good behaviour bond under Section 9 replaces imprisonment even if it forms a valid option, but cannot exceed a term of 5 years. [5] Section 10 considers the "extenuating circumstances" of an offence, as well as the importance of expediency, and is exercised when determined that any other form of punishment would be ineffective. [2] Section 12 guides the imposition of a good behaviour bond for an offender sentenced to less than 2 years' imprisonment. The sentence is suspended on the condition of the offender adhering to the good behavior bond. [2]

Queensland

In Queensland, the relevant act for good behaviour bonds is the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld). [6] Section 19(1)(b) states that "The court may make an order that the offender be released...on the conditions that the offender must be of good behaviour and appear for conviction and sentence if called on at any time during such period". [7] The good behaviour bond is also incorporated in Division 3 of the Act, which details the procedures of offenders who are released upon entering into "recognisance". Under this division, Sections 30(1)(a), 31 and 32(1)(b) describe the implied condition of good behaviour for a period of 1 year or less when the convicted individual "enters into a recognisance, with or without sureties". [7]

Victoria

With the abolition of "common law bonds" in Section 71, the Victorian courts instead refer to "adjourned undertakings" through the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic). [8] The concept of good behaviour bonds is reflected in Section 72, which allows the court to delay proceedings for the convicted offender for a maximum time frame of 5 years. The offender is required to be "of good behaviour during the period of the adjournment", thus retaining the concept of good behaviour bonds despite the formal abolition. During the period of the adjourned undertaking, the offender may also be required to undergo medical treatment according to their doctor or treatment professional's advice. [9] The court may ask for evidence of compliance through the provision of a doctor's letter or other proof of attendance. Furthermore, under Victorian state law, when the Court has imposed a good behaviour bond upon a young offender ("child"), it is stated that the child's charge must be dismissed if all conditions of the bond have been upheld during the set period. [10]

Northern Territory

Courts in the Northern Territory rely upon the Sentencing Act 1995 (NT), which parallels Victorian legislation in its abolition of common law bonds at Section 124. [11] However, Section 11(1)(b) states that once proven guilty, an offender may be released without a formal conviction, with the condition of good behaviour. This "good behaviour" condition is also described in Section 115(2)(a) of Part 10, with which the Administrator (referring to the representative of the Crown) may exercise a "prerogative of mercy" in releasing an offender. [12] Therefore, despite the indicated removal of bonds, in practice the Sentencing Act still grants magistrates the ability to hold offenders accountable for their behaviour upon conditional release.

South Australia

The Sentencing Act 2017 (SA) is referred to by South Australian magistrates when imposing a good behaviour bond. [13] Good behaviour is imposed as a general condition in Sections 72(1)(b) and 82(1)(a) for periodic detention and intensive correction orders respectively. The concept of a "good behaviour bond" is then described specifically in Section 97, which describes the "discharge of...defendants on entering into good behaviour bond." [14] An additional condition is clarified at subsection (3), which explicitly states the prohibition of seeking "fresh prosecution" against an offender, unless they have acted against the bond's requirements. The Legal Services Commission of South Australia clarifies that a good behaviour may be imposed both as a "standalone penalty", as well as the condition for an offender's suspended imprisonment sentence. [15]

Western Australia

In Western Australia, the Sentencing Act 1995 (WA) details the required circumstances of an offence for a good behaviour bond to apply. [16] In similar fashion to both legislation in Victoria and the Northern Territory, Section 12 of the Act states the abolition of the requirement for offenders to "enter into a bond...to be of good behaviour or keep the peace" under common law. [17] The requirements of a "conditional release order" (CRO) are detailed in Part 7, with Section 49(1) enabling the court to "impose any requirements...it decides are necessary to secure the good behaviour of the offender". However, this is restrained at Section 66(3) with the description of "community based orders" (CBO), as subsection 3(b) states that the court's imposed requirements should not be considered before any community service or programme options. [17]

Tasmania

The Sentencing Act 1997 is cited by the courts in Tasmania when determining whether good behaviour bonds are appropriate. [18] In its description of general sentencing powers wielded by the courts, under Section 7(f) of Part 2, the Act states that an offender may or may not be convicted. Within either case, the court may choose to adjourn proceedings for up to 60 months. The good behaviour bond is formed by the offender "giving an undertaking", as similarly referred to in Victorian legislation. [19] In the case of a released offender, Section 59(b) explicates the conditions of the undertaking described in 7(f), stating "that the offender must be of good behaviour during the period of adjournment". [19] The Sentencing Advisory Council under the Tasmanian state government also clarifies that a good behaviour is defined as a type of "recognizance". The classification of a "good behaviour bond" constitutes both "types of Recognizance" within the scope of the Australian Bureau of Statistics. [20]

Australian Capital Territory

The legislation applied to good behaviour bond imposition in the Australian Capital Territory is the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005. [21] The Act provides the most substantial explanation of good behaviour bond requirements in comparison to the legislation of the other States and Territories. Throughout the whole of Chapter 6, referred to as "good behaviour orders", the Act defines the varying conditions and specific court responsibilities when imposing good behaviour bonds in terms of community service (Part 6.1) and rehabilitation orders (Part 6.2). [22] Good behaviour orders are also defined under the Part 3.3 category of "Non-custodial sentences", where Section 13(3) clarifies that the order may entail one or more specific conditions (e.g. community service, rehabilitation or monetary reparations). [22]

The legal application of good behaviour bonds may be considered positively, due to research from the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) indicating that it may contribute to reduced rates of recidivism, as well as increased victim satisfaction with greater accountability for the offender. [23] However, law reform submissions have been made surrounding the potential issues of good behaviour bonds.

The Parliament of Australia heard submissions from the Redfern Legal Centre (RLC) surrounding the over-policing of Indigenous Australian offenders who were given non-custodial sentences (i.e. good behaviour bonds). [24] The policies which target these individuals, such as the New South Wales' Suspect Target Management Plan (STMP), were criticised by the RLC for their failure to distinguish between minor and major offences. The RLC claimed that this resulted in unjust treatment and the increased chance of re-offending or good behaviour bond breaches. [1]

Under consideration of current sentencing options (Section 19), the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) also reflected upon the process of implementing good behaviour bonds for young offenders from remote Indigenous Australian communities. The submission of the Oz Child Legal Service (OCLS) at 19.69 suggested that courts should take into account the offenders' varying perceptions of time when prescribing good behaviour bonds. The OCLS claimed that the given penalty should be achievable, and described in periods of time (e.g. school terms) which can be easily recognised by the offender. [25]

Relevant statistics

Non-custodial sentencing rates in Children's courts

In their 2017-18 analysis, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) found that "other non-custodial orders" was the most common type of sentencing in Children's Courts across Australian states and territories. This category was defined to include good behaviour bonds and recognisance orders, under which 53% (11,782) of defendants who were proven guilty received their sentence. [26]

Experimental family and domestic violence (FDV) statistics

The ABS' 2017-18 key findings also revealed that non-custodial orders (including good behaviour bonds) were the most common type of sentencing for individuals found guilty of perpetrating family and domestic violence. The statistics showed that 72% (2,115) of courts imposed good behaviour bonds as an alternative to sentences of correctional custody, community work and monetary orders (i.e. fines or other financial reparations). The exception among the Australian states and territories was the Northern Territory, where sentences for "custody in a correctional institution" was most relied upon by the Magistrates' and Children's Courts. [27]

Historical use of good behaviour bonds

The Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) provided statistics regarding the imposition rates of good behaviour bonds in Australian courts, prior to the report's publication date of 2013. The AIC found that an approximate total of 77,940 individuals were placed under the obligations of a good behaviour bond in 2011, which combined with the number of "fully suspended sentences" to make up 15% of total sentences in adult courts in Australia. [28]

Correlation between bond length and recidivism rates

Through the findings of their report, "Bonds, suspended sentences and reoffending: Does the length of the order matter?", the AIC claimed that "the instantaneous risk of reoffending [was] higher" for offenders who were given good behaviour bonds of longer time frames. [28] The data utilised to generate this conclusion was taken from the Bureau of Crime Statistic and Research's Reoffending Database, which has acquired its data from 1994 in Australian courts. However, the AIC also stated that in reality, a longer bond correlated to an increased term before a new criminal offence was recorded. Specifically, the AIC's analysis of offenders convicted in the New South Wales' Local Court over a two-year period (2006–2008) revealed that bond lengths of 0 to 23 months resulted in an average of 737.4 days until the "first new offence" had occurred. Meanwhile, good behaviour bonds of greater length than 24 months corresponded to the averaged longer term of 782.9 days before the sentenced individual had reoffended. [28]

The August 2016 issue of the Crime and Justice Bulletin, published by the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR), examined trends of good behaviour bond sentencing in NSW local courts. [29] The key claim identified the trend of good behaviour bonds (under Section 10(1)(b)) becoming increasingly common with a 8.4% increase (15.2% to 23.6%), as "one of the least severe penalties a court can impose on an offender". The BOCSAR identified assault, illicit substance use and traffic offences as some of the offences for which bonds were imposed between 2004 and 2015. It was acknowledged that reasons behind this trend were "unclear". [29] However, BOCSAR stated that the increase could be attributed to the Australian legal system attempting to respond to financial concerns which were associated with other alternative sentence options (i.e. monetary fines).

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indecent exposure</span> Public indecency involving nudity

Indecent exposure is the deliberate public exposure by a person of a portion of their body in a manner contrary to local standards of appropriate behavior. Laws and social attitudes regarding indecent exposure vary significantly in different countries. It ranges from outright prohibition of the exposure of any body parts other than the hands or face to prohibition of exposure of certain body parts, such as the genital area, buttocks or breasts.

<i>Youth Criminal Justice Act</i> Canadian statute

The Youth Criminal Justice Act is a Canadian statute, which came into effect on April 1, 2003. It covers the prosecution of youths for criminal offences. The Act replaced the Young Offenders Act, which itself was a replacement for the Juvenile Delinquents Act.

A suspended sentence is a sentence on conviction for a criminal offence, the serving of which the court orders to be deferred in order to allow the defendant to perform a period of probation. If the defendant does not break the law during that period and fulfills the particular conditions of the probation, the sentence is usually considered fulfilled. If the defendant commits another offence or breaks the terms of probation, the court can order the sentence to be served, in addition to any sentence for the new offence.

A habitual offender, repeat offender, or career criminal is a person convicted of a crime who was previously convicted of other crimes. Various state and jurisdictions may have laws targeting habitual offenders, and specifically providing for enhanced or exemplary punishments or other sanctions. They are designed to counter criminal recidivism by physical incapacitation via imprisonment.

Preventive detention is an imprisonment that is putatively justified for non-punitive purposes, most often to prevent further criminal acts.

In some common law nations, a recognizance is a conditional pledge of money undertaken by a person before a court which, if the person defaults, the person or their sureties will forfeit that sum. It is an obligation of record, entered into before a court or magistrate duly authorized, whereby the party bound acknowledges (recognizes) that they owe a personal debt to the state. A recognizance is subject to a "defeasance"; that is, the obligation will be avoided if person bound does some particular act, such as appearing in court on a particular day, or keeping the peace. In criminal cases the concept is used both as a form of bail when a person has been charged but not tried and also when a person has been found guilty at trial as an incentive not to commit further misconduct. The concept of a recognizance exists in Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, the Republic of Ireland, and the United States. Recognizances were frequently used by courts of quarter sessions, for example they make up more than 70% of surviving records for the Bedfordshire Quarter Sessions records.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (c.53) of the UK Parliament enables some criminal convictions to be ignored after a rehabilitation period. Its purpose is that people do not have a lifelong blot on their records because of a relatively minor offence in their past. The rehabilitation period is automatically determined by the sentence. After this period, if there has been no further conviction the conviction is "spent" and, with certain exceptions, need not be disclosed by the ex-offender in any context such as when applying for a job, obtaining insurance, or in civil proceedings. A conviction for the purposes of the ROA includes a conviction issued outside Great Britain and therefore foreign convictions are eligible to receive the protection of the ROA.

A discharge is a type of sentence imposed by a court whereby no punishment is imposed.

The Bolton 7 were a group of gay and bisexual men who were convicted on 12 January 1998 in the United Kingdom before Judge Michael Lever at Bolton Crown Court of the offences of gross indecency under the Sexual Offences Act 1956. Although gay sex was partially decriminalised by the Sexual Offences Act 1967, they were all convicted under section 13 of the 1956 Act because more than two men had sex together, which was still illegal. One of the participants was also six months under the statutory age of consent for male gay sex: at the time, such an age was set at 18, while the heterosexual and lesbian age of consent was instead set at 16.

The Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR), also known as NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, is an agency of the Department of Communities and Justice responsible for research into crime and criminal justice and evaluation of the initiatives designed to reduce crime and reoffending in the state of New South Wales, Australia.

The youth justice system in England and Wales comprises the organs and processes that are used to prosecute, convict and punish persons under 18 years of age who commit criminal offences. The principal aim of the youth justice system is to prevent offending by children and young persons.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which makes significant changes in many areas of the criminal justice system in England and Wales and, to a lesser extent, in Scotland and Northern Ireland. In particular, it changes the law relating to custodial sentences and the early release of prisoners to reduce prison overcrowding, which reached crisis levels in 2008. It also reduces the right of prison officers to take industrial action, and changed the law on the deportation of foreign criminals. It received royal assent on 8 May 2008, but most of its provisions came into force on various later dates. Many sections came into force on 14 July 2008.

Corrective Services New South Wales (CSNSW) is a division of the Department of Communities and Justice of the Government of New South Wales, Australia. CSNSW is responsible for the state's prisons and a range of programs for managing offenders in the community. The state has 36 prisons, 33 run by CSNSW and three privately operated. The agency traces its origins back to 1788, when New South Wales was founded as a penal colony.

A conditional sentence is a non-custodial punishment for crime. It is one type of criminal sentencing used in Canada.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Punishment in Australia</span>

Punishment in Australia arises when an individual has been accused or convicted of breaking the law through the Australian criminal justice system. Australia uses prisons, as well as community corrections. When awaiting trial, prisoners may be kept in specialised remand centres or within other prisons.

Sentencing in England and Wales refers to a bench of magistrates or district judge in a magistrate's court or a judge in the Crown Court passing sentence on a person found guilty of a criminal offence. In deciding the sentence, the court will take into account a number of factors: the type of offence and how serious it is, the timing of any plea of guilty, the defendant's character and antecedents, including their criminal record and the defendant's personal circumstances such as their financial circumstances in the case of a fine being imposed.

Drug courts have been established in New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Victoria, and Western Australia. People appearing in Australian drug courts often fall outside the parameters for other pre-court diversion programs.

The New South Wales Department of Communities and Justice, a department of the Government of New South Wales, is responsible for the delivery of services to some of the most disadvantaged individuals, families and communities; and the administration and development of a just and equitable legal system of courts, tribunals, laws and other mechanisms that further the principles of justice in the state of New South Wales, Australia. It also provides services to children and young people, families, people who are homeless, people with a disability, their families and carers, women, and older people. The department is the lead agency of the Stronger Communities cluster of the New South Wales government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lifetime probation</span>

Lifetime probation is reserved for relatively serious legal offenders. The ultimate purpose of lifetime probation is to examine whether offenders properly maintain good behavior as well as capability of patience under lifetime probation serving circumstance. An offender is required to abide by particular conditions for rest of their entire life in order to nurture superior social behaviour as a punishment for their criminal offence. Condition of probation orders contain supervision, electronic tagging, reporting to his or her probation or parole officer, as well as attending counselling. The essential component of lifetime probation carries the sense of being examined for well-being character and behaviour for life term period. Legislative framework regarding probation may vary depending on the country or the state within a certain country as well as the duration and condition of probational sentencing.

The Sentencing Advisory Council of Victoria is an independent statutory body that was established by the Victorian Government in 2004 to conduct research on sentencing in Victoria, Australia. The Council comprises a board of between 11 and 14 directors, who are supported by a secretariat. In Australia, there are also sentencing councils in New South Wales, Queensland and Tasmania. There are also Sentencing Councils in some overseas jurisdictions, such as England and Wales and Scotland

References

  1. 1 2 "Chapter 5: Reasons for high Indigenous imprisonment rates". Parliament of Australia. Retrieved 2019-05-12.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 "Good Behaviour Bonds and Non-Conviction Orders: A report of the NSW Sentencing Council" (PDF). NSW Sentencing Council. September 2011.
  3. 1 2 "Good Behaviour Bonds Explained". www.findlaw.com.au. Retrieved 2019-05-12.
  4. ↑ "Legislative Council Hansard - 30 November 1999". Parliament of New South Wales.
  5. ↑ "Section 9 good behaviour bonds". www.judcom.nsw.gov.au. Retrieved 2019-05-12.
  6. ↑ "Sentencing adult offenders". Queensland Sentencing Advisory Council. May 2012. Retrieved 2019-05-12.
  7. 1 2 "Penalties and Sentences Act 1992".
  8. ↑ "Sentencing Act 1991" (PDF).
  9. ↑ Browne, Kylie (2014-04-03). "Possible outcomes and penalties". www.legalaid.vic.gov.au. Retrieved 2019-05-28.
  10. ↑ "29.4.4 - Good behaviour bond". www.judicialcollege.vic.edu.au. Retrieved 2019-05-31.
  11. ↑ "Sentencing Act 1995". Northern Territory Government.
  12. ↑ "Good behaviour order: supervised". Northern Territory Government. 2016-03-08. Retrieved 2019-05-12.
  13. ↑ "Good behaviour bonds". Legal Services Commission of South Australia.
  14. ↑ "Sentencing Act 2017" (PDF). www.legislation.sa.gov.au. Retrieved 2019-05-21.
  15. ↑ "Good behaviour bonds". Legal Services Commission of South Australia.
  16. ↑ "After conviction: what next?". Government of Western Australia: Department of Justice. Retrieved 2019-05-12.
  17. 1 2 "Sentencing Act 1995" (PDF). Department of Justice - Western Australia.
  18. ↑ "Sentencing". Hobart Community Legal Service. Retrieved 2019-05-21.
  19. 1 2 "Tasmanian Legislation Online - Sentencing Act 1997". www.legislation.tas.gov.au. Retrieved 2019-05-13.
  20. ↑ Justice, Department of (2015-01-07). "Glossary". www.sentencingcouncil.tas.gov.au. Retrieved 2019-05-31.
  21. ↑ Bartels, Lorana; Weatherburn, Don; Poynton, Suzanne (2014). "Good behaviour bonds and re-offending: The effect of bond length". Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology. 47 (1): 25–43. doi:10.1177/0004865813504769. ISSN   0004-8658. S2CID   155034384.
  22. 1 2 "Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005" (PDF). ACT Legislation Register - Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005.
  23. ↑ Larsen, Jacqueline Joudo (2014). "AIC Reports: Research and Public Policy Series - "Restorative justice in the Australian criminal system"" (PDF). Australian Government - Australian Institute of Criminology.
  24. ↑ "Police Accountability". Australian Law Reform Commission. Retrieved 2019-05-21.
  25. ↑ "19. Sentencing: Sentencing options". Australian Government: Australian Law Reform Commission. 2010-07-29. Retrieved 2019-05-12.
  26. ↑ "4513.0 - Criminal Courts, Australia, 2017-18". Australian Bureau of Statistics.
  27. ↑ "4513.0 - Criminal Courts, Australia, 2017-18". Australian Bureau of Statistics.
  28. 1 2 3 "Bonds, suspended sentences and reoffending: Does the length of the order matter?". Australian Institute of Criminology.
  29. 1 2 Community Relations Division, freecall 1800 685 449; Justice, NSW Department of. "Trends in conditional discharges". www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au. Retrieved 2019-05-31.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.