Mandatory minimum jail terms better than Sentencing Guidelines Council, says state Opposition
MANDATORY minimum jail terms for Victoria’s worst criminals would boost public confidence in the justice system more than new sentencing guidelines, the state Opposition says.
Law & Order
Don't miss out on the headlines from Law & Order. Followed categories will be added to My News.
MANDATORY minimum jail terms for Victoria’s worst criminals would boost public confidence in the justice system more than new sentencing guidelines, the state Opposition says.
Shadow Attorney-General John Pesutto took aim at the Andrews Government over revelations in the Herald Sun judges refuse to sit on Labor’s planned new Sentencing Guidelines Council.
JUDGES SNUB GOVERNMENT’S SENTENCING GUIDELINES COUNCIL PLAN
HUGH DE KRETSER: MANDATORY JAIL TERMS NOT WAY TO CUT CRIME
The snub was met with disappointment from many groups, including the Law Institute of Victoria which says the Council “must contain a significant percentage of members of the legal community, particularly judicial members”.
Attorney-General Martin Pakula said he would discuss the issue with Chief Justice Anne Ferguson.
One of the reasons judges are “not comfortable” with the plan, which is for a 13-member panel made up of the courts, victims of crime, police, lawyers and academics to publish guidelines for courts, is the blurring of the executive and the judiciary. Attorney-General Martin Pakula said there had been pushback on a similar scheme when it was established in the UK, which he said now operates successfully.
Mr Pesutto said Mr Pakula and Premier Daniel Andrews were “missing the point”.
“Our view is that you best reflect on community values and expectations in sentencing when you listen to the people like we have,” Mr Pesutto said.
“That’s why we’ve announced strong mandatory minimum sentencing proposals for our most violent criminals as well as policies to crack down on concurrent sentencing and toughen bail laws.”