Section 3a Of The Crimes ( Sentencing Procedure ) Act 1999

1572 WordsSep 15, 20147 Pages
Section 3A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 outlines the official purposes of sentencing: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cpa1999278/s3a.html These ‘purposes’ are often said to be in conflict. Analyse these stated purposes in light of the broader philosophies of punishment in order to explain the tensions that are inherent in the business of punishing. Your essay should present an informed argument on which purposes and/or alternative understandings of justice should take precedence over others and why. The purposes of punishment in NSW have been a topic of great debate amongst contemporary society. At the heart of these discussions is two core theories for justifying punishment: the utilitarian theory, which situates itself around the idea that punishment is justified because it has a material benefit in preventing further crime, and the retributive theory, which simply says that punishment is a justified moral response to a crime. These two theories, in conjunction with the purposes of punishment outlined in S 3A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, will be analysed and discussed throughout this report. However, it is clear from the outset that there are many tensions that are inherent in the business of punishment. Firstly, several Australian states, intergovernmental organisations and the general populous have varying and distinctive views on the weight in which certain theories concerning the purposes of punishment should be

More about Section 3a Of The Crimes ( Sentencing Procedure ) Act 1999

Open Document