Local Courts in New South Wales.

Authors Avatar

Introduction

In 1788, when the first white settlers landed in Australia, any evidence of a just legal system was essentially non existent.  Military power, and dictatorship enforced by the Governor, was essentially the “rule of law”, with any criminal activity from the people punished accordingly by the Governor or his agents.  

Much has changed since those colonial times.  Today, Australia enforces a criminal law system governed by a number of individually recognized institutions of law, the effectiveness of which is to be explored in this report.

Aims of a good criminal legal system

The ultimate aim of a criminal law system is to successfully reduce and prevent crimes from ever occurring.  However, when a crime is committed, that aim then changes to apprehending the criminal, and punishing him accordingly within the acceptable boundaries of society.  A good criminal law system will also provide education, support, and advice for the general public.

Role of courts in the criminal law system

The courts play an essential role in the Australian criminal law system – they are seen by many as being the foremost administrators of legal justice.  The courts have the power to issue warrants for arrest, convict and sentence offenders, as well as indirectly acting as a deterrent for future offenders.  Courts also provide support and advice for the general populace, in the form of legal aid, brochures and counselors.

Local Courts in New South Wales

Paramatta Local Courts and Hornsby Local Courts were observed for the purposes of this report.

The initial impression that the Hornsby Local Courts gives is that it is an extremely busy court.  This is first apparent before any actual hearing of cases occurs, during the time which the Registrar Court operates to organize times and dates for future hearings.  To the uninitiated, this process of organizing hearing dates may seem to be chaotic at times; lawyers are constantly moving in and out of the courtroom, court officials seem stressed doing several tasks at once, and the Magistrate speaks with seemingly amazing speed.  There was a real sense of urgency to get through as many mentions as possible.  Legal jargon seems to be entrenched in this process, certainly, the general public would have a difficult time absorbing what was being said by both the Magistrate and the lawyers.  Thankfully, the Registrar Court is a process that defendants stay out of, leaving instead the job to the multitude of lawyers and prosecutors of our legal system.

The system was much easier to understand once actual cases were being heard in the court.  The police were responsible for prosecuting, proving two police prosecutors for the day.  The majority of criminal offences tried were traffic offences, ranging from the common “drink driving” charge to the more absurd “Stop on/near pedestrian crossing” charge.  Most, if not all defendants present for traffic offences were unrepresented by a lawyer, most likely because of the costs involved hiring a lawyer.  Legal Aid was not provided for these trivial matters.

Join now!

It was interesting to note how the court went about sentencing repeating traffic offenders who pleaded guilty to their crimes – the court would order the defendants to undergo a “Traffic Offender’s Program”, which if they satisfactorily completed, would significantly lower their sentence.  This order by the Magistrate is a prime example of legal discretion in the criminal system, where the court takes into account a range of other factors besides legal arguments in sentencing the defendant.

An application for bail was also heard, for a defendant who appeared on the charges of “Breaking and Entering, Larceny of ...

This is a preview of the whole essay