By DAVID HANCOCK from his new book Decades in Darwin
In 1997, the Northern Territory government commenced a regime of mandatory imprisonment for a range of property offences, including theft, criminal damage, unlawful entry, unlawful use of a motor vehicle, robbery and receiving stolen property.
Urged on by a vocal local media, the CLP government, led by Chief Minister Shane Stone, said changes to the Sentencing Act and the Juvenile Justice Act was a way of “getting tough on crime”; the scheme misfired spectacularly in that it basically singled out Aboriginal youth, mainly boys and young men, clogged up the justice system and filled Territory jails to overflowing. There were international calls to dump the legislation because it broke Human Rights charters.
Under the legislation, adult offenders were to be imprisoned for 14 days for a first offence, 90 days for a second offence and a year for a third offence. Juvenile offenders (15 to 17 years old) were to be imprisoned for 28 days for a second offence.
According to policy lawyer, David Gibson, introduction of mandatory sentencing represented a situation where normal considerations which dictate the development of legal policy were over-ridden by political considerations.
“(It) ultimately produced a law that was not only unfair, but was likely to achieve the opposite effect to what was intended.” In some cases, teenagers were sent to prison for menial offences such as stealing a drink from a shop or taking a packet of biscuits.
Many NT judges opposed the legislation, saying it removed a magistrate’s ability to use their experience to make wise and just decisions; they claimed the laws were arbitrary and not proportionate to the crime and they were being forced by politicians to lock people up for minor offences.
The legal profession argued that young offenders who may well have been diverted into community programs and towards rehabilitation were being exposed to hardened criminals in jail and could ultimately become another statistic for Aboriginal deaths in custody.
While Aboriginal justice organisations and the Land Councils fought tooth and nail against the legislation, and First Nations people attended demonstrations in Darwin and Alice Springs, the CLP government was unapologetic in its support of mandatory sentencing; Chief Minister Shane Stone went a step further in following years to introduce American-style Zero Tolerance Policing on the streets of Darwin.
The legislation was amended after a Labor Government, led by Clare Martin, was elected in 2001.
PHOTOS: Top – Indigenous people demonstrate in Darwin against Mandatory Sentencing legislation. Above – Aboriginal people walk away from an anti-mandatory sentencing demonstration in Darwin. Photographer: David Hancock. Copyright: SkyScans.
(1) Liberal Party in, jails full. (2) Labor Party in, jails empty. Let’s put it to the vote, (1) or (2).
AJB, I beg to differ.
(1) CLP in, jails overfloing. (2) Labor Party in, jails full.
When the CLP trounced Eva Lawler’s NT government, we witnessed Shane Stone, the President of the CLP, claim credit in a victory speech. I perceive some similarities to the subsequent Elon Musk performance when Donald Trump claimed victory in the USA elections.
The ALP and CLP engaged in a “tough on crime” bidding match which, under the guidance of Shane Stone, the CLP convincingly won.
I remember the introduction of mandatory sentencing and the furore it caused especially amongst the legal and civil libertarian fraternities. What I had forgotten, is that Shane Stone was the Chief Minister at the time.
The CLP government have wasted no time in following up on their tough on crime agenda. In a swath of legislation, such as lowering the age of criminal responsibility, there is however no intention to reintroduce mandatory sentencing. There is no need.
Of the record number of prisoners in the NT, half are on remand.
In effect they are serving a mandatory sentence (on average exceeding 200 days) while they wait for their day in court.
More fully serviced housing, particularly more for single persons. Similar accommodations for most of those in Corrections.