Queensland Law Society Media Release

QLS Warns on "Law and Order" Implications

The introduction of widespread minimum mandatory sentences for criminal offences could actually lead to a weakening of the justice system with outstanding potential candidates for judicial appointments refusing to serve because their discretionary sentencing power had been compromised, the Law Society President, Mr Glenn Ferguson, said today.

"Distinguished practitioners who would bring experience, insight, a true appreciation of fairness and justice and a keen knowledge of the law could well decide that they didn't want to serve on the bench if they could not truly determine how to make the punishment fit the crime. Minimum mandatory sentences were a 'one size fits all' philosophy and amounted to a deliberate and calculated disrespect of the judiciary." Mr Ferguson said.

"The discretionary sentencing power of judges is critical and central to their independence."

Mr Ferguson said the introduction of minimum mandatory sentences could also have the directly opposite intended effect of ensuring some offenders were jailed as some juries could be reluctant to find defendants guilty if they knew that a significant mandatory penalty would automatically apply.

"That would have to be the supreme irony for the 'law and order' advocates," he said.

"The Law Society is a strictly non-political organisation with members who support all political parties but we are unanimously supportive of an independent and respected judiciary. It saddens and concerns me when any political party refuses to express confidence in the judiciary."

Mr Ferguson said it was very important in the election campaign for all parties and candidates not to engage in what effectively was an abuse of the justice system and the judiciary and to recognize that the existing tried and true system with an exhaustive appeals process was as good as human beings could devise.