Judges snub Andrews Government’s Sentencing Guidelines Council plan
THE state’s Supreme Court judges have thumbed their noses at an Andrews Government bid to give Victorians a greater say on the sentencing of serious criminals.
Law & Order
Don't miss out on the headlines from Law & Order. Followed categories will be added to My News.
EXCLUSIVE: SUPREME Court judges have thumbed their noses at an Andrews Government bid to give Victorians a greater say on the sentencing of serious criminals.
Almost a year after Premier Daniel Andrews and Attorney-General Martin Pakula announced the radical plan to boost public confidence in the justice system, it has stalled after judges refused to participate, the Herald Sun can confirm.
The Supreme Court directly challenged the government’s proposal, saying that judges were not comfortable with the idea of sitting on a Sentencing Guidelines Council.
CHIEF PROSECUTOR SLAMS VICTORIAN JUDGES FOR SOFT SENTENCING
HIGH COURT RULINGS EXPOSE VICTORIA’S SENTENCING MESS: NORRIE ROSS
The judicial snub was delivered despite the Premier and Attorney-General last year trumpeting that judges would sit on the council, in a move likely to deliver more jail time for certain offences.
Mr Pakula said last night it would be “disappointing” if Victoria’s system failed to replicate a successful British model, but that regardless of judicial participation the public would still have “a greater say in the setting of sentencing standards”.
The Herald Sun understands that the Supreme Court has told the Sentencing Advisory Council — which was asked to advise the government on a model for it to adopt — that it would be inappropriate for judges to take part. One reason for this was a belief that this would mix judicial and executive roles.
The court suggested that retired judges play a role instead.
Mr Andrews and Mr Pakula last year proposed Australia’s first Sentencing Guidelines Council, modelled on a British system, to help tell courts how long criminals should spend in prison for certain offences.
“The Victorian model ... will be made up of judges and magistrates, victims of crime representatives, the Director of Public Prosecutions, police, legal stakeholders and academia,” said a press release on May 25, 2017.
Guidelines would be created and published with input from those groups, but the plan would not remove judicial discretion in individual sentences.
It is understood that representatives of the Sentencing Council for England and Wales, on which judges sit, came to Australia last year to brief Victorian stakeholders, including judges.
However, the Supreme Court appears unconvinced.
Victims of Crime Commissioner Greg Davies said courts and other relevant parties had been given an important chance to participate in the process. “If they have declined that opportunity, either they have to live with that or the government decides to scrap it — that’s a matter for government,” he said.
Mr Pakula said: “Whether or not serving judges ultimately sit directly on the council, the community is going to have a greater say in the setting of sentencing standards.
“That part is not negotiable,” he said.
“The sentencing councils in England and Scotland, which both contain serving judges, have been highly successful, and it would be disappointing if we could not replicate that successful model,’ he said.
“The (proposed) Sentencing Guidelines Council is an important opportunity for the courts to engage with the community on sentencing, and the government is involved in discussions with the courts to provide that opportunity.”
The Sentencing Advisory Council is believed to have reported to government on options for the guidelines body, after its deadline was extended beyond March 29. It declined to comment last night.
A Supreme Court spokesman said: “The Sentencing Advisory Council is yet to release its advice to government, and the court does not propose to comment before then.”
MORE HERALD SUN NEWS:
VICTORIA POLICE REPLACES DISGRACED TOP COP