Section 120 of the Constitution of Australia

Last updated

Yatala Labour Prison, South Australia Yatala prison rear 2008.JPG
Yatala Labour Prison, South Australia

Section 120 of the Constitution of Australia provides that

Contents

Custody of offenders against laws of the Commonwealth

Every State shall make provision for the detention in its prisons of persons accused or convicted of offences against the laws of the Commonwealth, and for the punishment of persons convicted of such offences, and the Parliament of the Commonwealth may make laws to give effect to this provision. [1]

Application

The possibility of federal prisons

The system of using State prisons to hold federal prisoners differs from that of other federations such as the United States, which has separate prisons for State prisoners and federal prisoners. [2] Section 120 does not prevent the establishment of a federal prison system in Australia; it merely gives the Commonwealth the option of using State prisons instead should it wish to do so. [3] :p 643

Indeed, the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) has on several occasions given consideration to the creation of a separate federal prison system but on each occasion has declined to recommend it, citing existing infrastructure, geographic dispersal and the relatively low number of federal offenders among its reasons for believing such a system to be inviable. [4] :p 16 In June 2004, it was found that federal prisoners only made up between 4 and 5 percent of Australia's prison population (approximately 700 people). [2]

Funding

The States must bear the cost of detaining and punishing federal prisoners, although this burden is lessened by grants from the Commonwealth. [5] :p 135

Differential treatment of federal prisoners

In Leeth v Commonwealth, the High Court found that there was no requirement that prison conditions of federal prisoners be uniform across the Commonwealth. [3] :p 643

It is unclear whether or not the Commonwealth may make rules as to the treatment of its prisoners held in State prisons, or if it is bound to accept the State prisons as they are. At present, however, the Commonwealth has not created any such rules and federal prisoners are treated the same way as the State prisoners in their prison.

Opinions are divided as to whether it would be desirable for the Commonwealth to create rules that specifically relate to federal prisoners, but there is a general acceptance that creating two classes of prisoners within a single prison could cause practical difficulties. Then Solicitor-General of Australia Justin Gleeson wrote that "at a practical level, it is hard to conceive how a state can sensibly run its prisons by according differential standards of treatment to prisoners depending upon whether the original crime was committed under federal or state law," [6] :p 127 while Professor Matthew Groves of Monash University wrote that the present arrangement was preferable to avoid the "potential resentment and confusion in management that would be generated by enforcing two different regimes within one prison for similar classes of prisoners". [3] :p 643

Related Research Articles

Life imprisonment is any sentence of imprisonment for a crime under which convicted people are to remain in prison for the rest of their natural lives or indefinitely until pardoned, paroled, or otherwise commuted to a fixed term. Crimes for which, in some countries, a person could receive this sentence include murder, torture, terrorism, child abuse resulting in death, rape, espionage, treason, drug trafficking, drug possession, human trafficking, severe fraud and financial crimes, aggravated criminal damage, arson, kidnapping, burglary, and robbery, piracy, aircraft hijacking, and genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes or any three felonies in case of three-strikes law. Life imprisonment can also be imposed, in certain countries, for traffic offences causing death. Life imprisonment is not used in all countries; Portugal was the first country to abolish life imprisonment, in 1885.

Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act US federal law

The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, commonly referred to as the 1994 Crime Bill, the Clinton Crime Bill, or the Biden Crime Law, is an Act of Congress dealing with crime and law enforcement; it became law in 1994. It is the largest crime bill in the history of the United States and consisted of 356 pages that provided for 100,000 new police officers, $9.7 billion in funding for prisons were designed with significant input from experienced police officers. Sponsored by U.S. Representative Jack Brooks of Texas, the bill was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Bill Clinton. Then-Senator Joe Biden of Delaware drafted the Senate version of the legislation in cooperation with the National Association of Police Organizations, also incorporating the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) with Senator Orrin Hatch.

Parole Provisional release of a prisoner who agrees to certain conditions

Parole is a form of early release of a prison inmate where the prisoner agrees to abide by certain behavioral conditions, including checking-in with their designated parole officers, or else they may be rearrested and returned to prison.

Probation in criminal law is a period of supervision over an offender, ordered by the court often in lieu of incarceration.

A federal prison is operated under the jurisdiction of a federal government as opposed to a state or provincial body. Federal prisons are used for convicts who violated federal law, inmates considered dangerous (Brazil), or those sentenced to longer terms of imprisonment (Canada). Not all federated countries have a legal concept of "federal prison".

Mandatory sentencing requires that offenders serve a predefined term for certain crimes, commonly serious and violent offenses. Judges are bound by law; these sentences are produced through the legislature, not the judicial system. They are instituted to expedite the sentencing process and limit the possibility of irregularity of outcomes due to judicial discretion. Mandatory sentences are typically given to people who are convicted of certain serious and/or violent crimes, and require a prison sentence. Mandatory sentencing laws vary across nations; they are more prevalent in common law jurisdictions because civil law jurisdictions usually prescribe minimum and maximum sentences for every type of crime in explicit laws.

Crime in Australia Australian police information

Crime in Australia is managed by various law enforcement bodies, the federal and state-based criminal justice systems and state-based correctional services.

A habitual offender, repeat offender, or career criminal, is a person convicted of a crime who was previously convicted of 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.

<i>Fardon v Attorney-General (Qld)</i> Judgement of the High Court of Australia

Fardon v Attorney-General (Qld) (2004) 223 CLR 575 was a case decided in the High Court of Australia regarding the separation of powers in Australia.

The New South Wales Sentencing Council is an advisory body established by the New South Wales Government to provide guidelines and to promote consistency in sentencing of offenders in New South Wales, a state of Australia. The council provides advice and counsel to the Attorney General of New South Wales on issues relating to sentencing, parole periods for sentences, trends, and the operation of parole. The council aims to promote consistency and transparency in sentencing and promoting public understanding of the sentencing process. The Sentencing Council consists of members appointed by the attorney general. Those members are made up from a diverse background to better represent the views of the community. They include retired judges, law enforcement officers, defence lawyers, indigenous community members and persons associated with victims of crime.

The Judicial Commission of New South Wales is an independent statutory corporation of the New South Wales Government that provides sentencing information and continuing education to and examines complaints made against judicial officers in New South Wales, Australia.

Aboriginal Community Court, or Aboriginal court was the name given to the specialised courts dealing with Indigenous Australian offenders in the state of Western Australia between 2006 and 2015.

At Her Majesty's pleasure is a legal term of art referring to the indeterminate or undetermined length of service of certain appointed officials or the indeterminate sentences of some prisoners. It is based on the proposition that all legitimate authority for government comes from the Crown. Originating in the United Kingdom, it is now used throughout the Commonwealth realms, Lesotho, Eswatini, Brunei and monarchies outside of the Commonwealth. In realms where the monarch is represented by a governor-general, governor or administrator, the phrase may be modified to be at the Governor's pleasure, since the governor-general, governor, lieutenant governor or administrator is the Queen's personal representative in the country, state or province.

Prison Institution in which people are legally physically confined

A prison, also known as a jail or gaol, penitentiary, detention center, correction center, correctional facility, lock-up, hoosegow or remand center, is a facility in which inmates are confined against their will and usually denied a variety of freedoms under the authority of the state as punishment for various crimes. Prisons are most commonly used within a criminal justice system: people charged with crimes may be imprisoned until their trial; those pleading or being found guilty of crimes at trial may be sentenced to a specified period of imprisonment. In simplest terms, a prison can also be described as a building in which people are legally held as a punishment for a crime they have committed.

Indigenous Australians are both convicted of crimes and imprisoned at a disproportionately higher rate in Australia, as well as being over-represented as victims of crime. As of September 2019, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander prisoners represented 28% of the total adult prisoner population, while accounting for 2% of the general adult population. Various explanations have been given for this over-representation, both historical and more recent. Federal and state governments and Indigenous groups have responded with various analyses, programs and measures.

Punishment in Australia

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.

Incarceration of women Imprisonment of women

This article discusses the incarceration of women in correctional facilities.

Across the world, 625,000 women and children are being held in penal institutions with the female prison population growing on all five continents.

<i>Bail Act 2013</i>

The Bail Act 2013 is a New South Wales law that came into effect on 20 May 2014. It replaces the Bail Act 1978, which was considered "groundbreaking" when enacted, but has been reformed several times to presume against bail. The new act was created with the aims that it would be easier to understand, would further protect the community and would promote consistent decision-making. The Bail Act 2013 uses an "unacceptable risk" test in regard to whether "the accused will fail to appear in any proceedings for the offence, commit a serious offence, endanger the safety of victims, individuals or the community, or interfere with witnesses or evidence".

Criminal justice reform in the United States

Criminal justice reform addresses structural issues in criminal justice systems such as racial profiling, police brutality, overcriminalization, mass incarceration, and recidivism. Reforms can take place at any point where the criminal justice system intervenes in citizens’ lives, including lawmaking, policing, sentencing and incarceration. Criminal justice reform can also address the collateral consequences of conviction, including disenfranchisement or lack of access to housing or employment, that may restrict the rights of individuals with criminal records.

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. 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. These imposed conditions are determined by state legislation and at the magistrate's discretion. A good behaviour bond may be established with or without a recorded legal conviction for the offence. 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.

References

  1. Constitution (Cth) s 120 Custody of offenders against laws of the Commonwealth.
  2. 1 2 Opeskin, Brian (2004). "The sentencing of Federal offenders". Australian Law Reform Commission - Reform Journal. (2004) 85 Australian Law Reform Commission Reform Journal 44, ISSN   0313-153X
  3. 1 2 3 Groves, Matthew. "Administrative Segregation of Prisoners: Powers, Principles of Review and Remedies" (PDF).{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help) (1996) 20(3) Melbourne University Law Review 639. ISSN   0025-8938
  4. Sentencing (PDF) (Report). [1988] Australian Law Reform Commission Reports 44. ISBN   0-644-06910-4
  5. Same Crime, Same Time: Sentencing of Federal Offenders (Report). [2006] Australian Law Reform Commission Reports 103. ISBN   0-9758213-3-4
  6. Gleeson, Justin. "A Federal Human Rights - What Implications For the State and Territories?" (PDF).{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help) (2010) 33(1) University of New South Wales Law Journal 110. ISSN   0313-0096