Community Legal Centres Of Australia

Justice can be a controversial subject when it comes to what people want to get out of it. Victims of offences want offenders to be penalised accordingly for their actions, though justice does not always work in their favour. For some people in society, justice can vary from having to pay significant fines to incarceration but how can we truly achieve justice as a community? Communities should come together to work out processes and orders to achieve the type of justice they want to see, focusing on long term outcomes instead of the short term. ‘Priority is given to the community, enhancing its responsibility for social control while building its capacity to achieve this and other outcomes relevant

In this essay I will examine the development of Australian society and subsequent rights given to Australian citizens, thus addressing the guiding question as quoted at the top of the paper.

Provision [SCRGSP], 2005; Jeffries and Bond, 2012). It is also widely discussed that there is an overrepresentation of Indigenous Australians in the criminal justice system itself (Jeffries and Bond, 2009), representing up to one quarter of prisoners in Australia (Makkai and Payne, 2003; Payne, 2005). This essay will address the current issues that Indigenous Australians face within the criminal justice system, particularly, with courts. The aim of this essay besides addressing these issues will also be to provide suggestions or alternatives that may help resolve the presented issues and improve the experience for Indigenous Australians in court.

In Australia and around the world, social justice, civil rights and freedom have constantly been a point of debate and struggle. With government and higher powers attempting to make everything work with each other and get rid of discord, they subsequently affect another person’s freedom. Advocates for rights and freedom vouch for many different things, from racial equality to homosexual civil rights, every case brings with it political opposition. Over many years of trial and tribulation the modern activist has almost overcome the struggles of previous generations. That is not to say there is no longer any struggle at all.

In today's Australia the price of handling a substantial litigation matter is unobtainable for the average Australian, justice does indeed go to the highest bidder and “Unless you are a millionaire or a pauper, the cost of going to court to protect your rights is beyond you.” George Brandis, shadow attorney-general. To say that justice is earned and reserved for the population of Australia is a myth and it is true that legal aid community centres are grossly underfunded and explicitly for those in dire need of legal aid and do not represent the common Australian, there is no universal legal safety-net unlike the education and health systems.

This essay looks at Indigenous Australians in relation to the institution of ‘Criminal Law’. In this context, criminal law refers to legal processes such as police questioning, investigation and detainment as well as arrest, custody and bail. It also encompasses associated court procedures up to the point of sentencing. The focus will be to first outline the importance of criminal law to Indigenous Australians and then provide a critical analysis of the unique experiences and barriers that this group encounter in accessing criminal law in a positive way. Following this analysis, the development of possible ways to improve Indigenous access to criminal law will be discussed. Particular attention will be given to the way in which Indigenous Australians are affected by the transition of our modern justice system toward broader social justice concepts that incorporate risk management of potential criminal behaviour. From this discussion a conclusion will be drawn as to whether or not Indigenous Australians enjoy equality of criminal law and whether the structural elements of the law itself perpetuate Indigenous injustice and disadvantage.

More than ever people are losing access to justice. Even though the global economic crisis affected everyone, and every jurisdictions budget there needs to be a minimum level of funding for legal aid to protect the rights of those that cannot afford legal aid (Hainsworth, 2010). According to Hainsworth, (2010) the Canadian Bar Association has asked for national standards for legal aid, just like there are standards for health care and education. The CBA believes legal aid reform is needed to ensure access to justice for low income people, it also believes funding must be increased and national standards for eligibility and civil coverage are necessary to make the system function properly again.

The Australian legal system follows a formal structure, strict rules of evidence and conduct and utilizes the adversarial system of trial for both criminal and civil proceedings. The procedure relies on the skills of representatives of each party and evidence concerning the case presented to an impartial judge or magistrate (and sometimes a jury). Courts apply fairness to a profound extent through adopting the doctrine of natural justice, parties involved have the right to know accusations made so they are able to collect evidence for defence and cross examination. Fairness was practiced in the case Southan v Costa (2017) NSWLEC 1230 that cited the Trees (Disputes between Neighbours) Act 2006 which instructed the Land and Environment Court NSW on only making an order if the tree concerned had caused harm or posed future threat. Fairness was also demonstrated through the referral to precedents including the Freeman v Dillon (2012) NSWLEC 1057 to assess the degree of damage, necessary action and consistent orders. The previous cases assisted in concluding the orders of the Court ‘requiring periodic removal of dead wood’ to reduce the risk of injury and annoyance of natural shedding past the respondent’s property. Court jurisdiction and high enforceability aid in achieving justice for individuals when ruling sentences and court orders. Enforceability is exemplified when the actor Steve Bisley was ordered to perform 300 hours of community service by the magistrate of Sydney's Downing Centre Local Court for charges of actual bodily harm relating to domestic violence towards his former wife Sally Burleigh in September 2009. This case additionally reflected equality in application regardless political, social and religious standing, gender and racial identity. The effectiveness of courts achieving justice in

Justice is the concept of moral rightness that is based on equality, access and fairness. This means that the law is applied equally, understood by all people and does not have a particularly harsh effect on an individual. In Australia, the adversary system is used as a means to achieve justice by proving the accused, beyond reasonable doubt, committed the crime. The criminal trial process has many features which aim to fulfill the requirements of achieving justice. These elements, though considers equality, fairness and access, are flawed in practice. Flaws such as the handling of evidence, jurors not understanding instructions, inadequate funds for legal

The administration of criminal justice and the operation of criminal process play an important role in our ever-changing society. The current structure of the New South Wales criminal justice system, as described by leading critic Doreen McBarnet as the ‘two tiers of justice’, has attracted many critiques namely the ideology of triviality, summary offence punishment and other legal notions such as technocratic justice. I have applied the above concepts during the course of my observation to Local, District and Supreme Courts of New South Wales in April 2016. The following report will assess the validity of the above concepts at a practical level in light with my observation and research, drawing intrinsic links between two tiers of justice and technocratic justice, and concluding with the two tiers of justice as a necessary framework in our modern criminal justice system.

The perception of the Australian criminal justice system’s legitimacy is determined by the actions of three institutions, and the manner in which they address issues of justice within society. For the criminal justice system to be seen with integrity and valued for its role, it is vital that all members of the community see the appropriate rectification of injustices through the police, courts and corrections. However, particular groups within society encounter the illegitimacy and social inequity embedded within these institutions, diminishing the effectiveness to which they fulfill their role. For women in particular, the institutions of the criminal justice system are notably unethical in their treatment of both victims and perpetrators of crime. Despite many reforms and recommendations for change, the criminal justice system ultimately fails in achieving justice for women, with the courts demonstrating the most significant attempt to eliminate social inequality and victimisation.

Based on the 2012 survey conducted by the New South Whales Law and Justice Foundation, it showed that around 1.7 million Australians can expect to encounter a legal problem each year and 490,000 of those people will not receive legal advice due to financial reasons or lack of knowledge. The prices for legal services have increase by 49% in the last 6 years alone. This dramatic inflation of costs within the justice system leads to increased difficulty within society to be able to afford anything but the most basic of legal representation. When people who can’t afford a lawyer turn to government funded legal assistance, they find that due to chronic funding shortages, ongoing help is often restricted to those on only the lowest incomes and even further, is only for a narrow collection of family and criminal legal

They state that access to justice directs at the impeachments of barriers that confront people living in poverty from utilizing the legal system in the form of three “waves”. The first wave entailed the emergence of legal aid in the developed countries in the period after the Second World War. This wave intended to provide direct legal services to economically disadvantaged persons involved in the justice system. More recently, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers (Knaul, A/HRC/23/43, 15 March 2013) state that legal aid seeks to eradicate the barriers which impede access to justice by providing assistance to those who would not otherwise have been able to afford legal representation and access to the court system (Knaul, A/HRC/23/43, 15 March 2013, para. 27). To be more specific, the right to legal aid refers to both a right and an essential guarantee for the effective exercise of other human rights including the right to an effective remedy, the right to equality before the courts and tribunals, the right to counsel and the right to a fair trial (Knaul, A/HRC/23/43, 15 March 2013, para.

The Access to Justice Gap means that there are more people who are eligible for legal assistance but there are not enough lawyers to accept their cases. This is a growing inequality. This is relevant because is shows the inequality within the system. There are cases that possibly should go to court but without legal assistance especially to those who cannot afford it, there is no possible way for them to

The fundamental objectives of the Law and Justice foundations is to contribute to the development of a fair and equitable justice system that addresses the legal needs of the community, and to improve access to justice by the community. According to B&B the early notion is that ‘access to justice involves: access to high quality legal services or effective dispute resolution mechanisms effective to protect rights, equal access to legal services and to legal services markets that operate competitively and equity before the law. The Australian Court system is an adversarial system; a central principle of the rule of law is that all parties involved in legal procedures receive procedural fairness and access to justice. Justice will depend upon the circumstances surrounding the evaluation and the legal, social or political context in which it is represented. In all aspects, justice implies a sense of equality for all, and an acceptance of a standard that applies to the whole community. It is suggested that legal aid and access to justice in general are important in maintaining society’s liberalism that is the rights of the individual against the community and the state. However, many barriers exist which can limit access to justice such as race, socio-cultural socio-economic factors, sex, language barriers and increasing costs of legal services. This essay will explore the problems associated with the definition of law, problems with accessing legal advice and services as