Statement on Mandatory Sentencing
Professor Alice Tay, President, Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, HREOC Press Conference, 17 February 2000
First of all I'd like to thank you all for coming to here today. It is timely that we meet the day before Mr Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the United Nations arrives in Australia. It is from the United Nations that the international obligations we are discussing today are sourced.
As a nation, Australia is committed to the active protection of human rights in East Timor. These human rights are derived from the same obligations I have just mentioned.
However, Australia's mandatory sentencing laws mean that we violate the same international standards we are working so vigorously to protect in East Timor, less than an hour's flight away from Darwin.
It's quite unusual for us to call directly on the federal government for urgent action and it's been quite a while since we've done so.
However, the issue of mandatory sentencing has been of great concern to the Commission since 1992 when it was first introduced in Western Australia in 1992.
We have consistently opposed mandatory sentencing and we continue to do today.
Before I hand over to my colleagues Social Justice Commissioner Bill Jonas and Human Rights Commissioner Chris Sidoti, there are a few points I am compelled to make as President of the Human Rights Commission.
- As stated in many media reports over the past week, mandatory sentencing laws violate Australia's international human rights obligations.
In particular, they contravene article nine of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which states that all offenders shall not be subject to arbitrary detention. This covenant was ratified by Australia in 1980.Mandatory sentencing laws also violate the international minimum standards for the sentencing of juveniles. These are clearly set out in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child or CROC, which was ratified by Australia in 1990.
These International treaties are binding on Australia and it is the federal government's responsibility to fulfil its international obligations.
- Mandatory sentencing laws are contrary to the principles of justice, which call for punishments to be appropriate to the offence and the offender.
In the case of children, detention should only be considered as the last resort. Mandatory sentencing makes it the only resort.The best interests of the child must be a primary consideration when making sentencing decisions. These laws take away a young person's right to a variety of sentencing options.
Only a judge who can choose from a range of sentencing options is equipped to consider the best interests of the child.
- Mandatory sentencing does not work.
While little detailed Australian research has been conducted in assessing its effectiveness, studies in the USA indicate that mandatory penalties prevent little or no crime.There is no evidence to suggest that these laws have made a significant impact on crime statistics in either the Northern Territory or Western Australia. The precise preventative effects of mandatory sentencing laws are still being disputed.
- Mandatory sentencing diverts scarce resources away crime prevention to the most expensive option of detention.
The latest "Trends and Issues" paper published in December by the Australian Institute of Criminology estimates that it costs around $60,000 to keep a prisoner imprisoned for one year and $200, 000 to build just one new cell.The enormous government investment required by mandatory sentencing laws would return a much better yield in terms of crime prevention if it were invested in prevention policies in areas such as education.
This money could be used to fund real programs and policies which provided assistance to the disadvantaged young people affected by mandatory sentencing today.
- Conclusion.
It is certainly clear that the Western Australian and Northern Territory governments have no intention of repealing these punitive and inhumane laws. As the Commonwealth has the ultimate responsibility to protect human rights, the Human Rights Commission strongly urges the Federal Government to legislate so that these offensive laws are annulled.Last updated 1 December 2001It is appropriate for Australia's national parliament to legislate to ensure that, in every state and territory, the treatment of children and young offenders conforms with Australia's international obligations.
