After three strikes-the continued discriminatory impact of the sentencing system against indigenous Australians: suggested reform
Neal, Luke and Bagaric, Mirko 2002, After three strikes-the continued discriminatory impact of the sentencing system against indigenous Australians: suggested reform, Criminal law journal, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 279-292.
Attached Files
(Some files may be inaccessible until you login with your Deakin Research Online credentials)
Name
Description
MIMEType
Size
Downloads
Title
After three strikes-the continued discriminatory impact of the sentencing system against indigenous Australians: suggested reform
Three strikes laws are discriminatory but not for previously advanced reasons. The three strikes laws are merely an acute example of a fundamentally flawed sentencing system that discriminates against economically and socially disadvantaged people, particularly the group that is the focus of this article – Indigenous Australians. The repeal of the Northern Territory's mandatory sentencing laws has not remedied the unfair manner in which sentencing law and practice operate against Aboriginals; either in the Northern Territory or generally. Criminal punishment systems around the world punish a disproportionate number of socially deprived people. In Australia, Indigenous Australians were grossly over-represented in Australian jails prior to the three strikes laws and will remain so unless steps are taken to address their disadvantage. The obvious solution to redress the over-representation by Indigenous Australians is to provide them with the same social opportunities and resources as the rest of the community. This is overly ambitious – at least in the short term. This article suggests a more attainable change in sentencing law to remedy some of the disadvantages experienced by Aboriginals. It suggests that far less weight should be accorded to prior convictions in the sentencing calculus.