Australian Legal System Case Study

1935 Words8 Pages
Legal Studies How well does the Australian Legal System deal with the contemporary issue (drug use and the law) The Australian legal system was developed from the legal system of Britain originally, between 1855 and 1890 the British parliament granted a limited right to set up a local system of governments to each of the British colonies within Australia. This allowed each of the colonies the right to develop their own laws and legal systems to deal with its particular situation. There was a move towards creating a central legal system during the late 19th century, a referendum was held in each colony to approve the draft constitution. The Australian Constitution Act was passed as an Act of the British Government and took effect on January…show more content…
Similarly, other possible drug-related crimes, such as theft, burglary and robbery, are all extremely serious offences which carry severe penalties. However, the imposition of punitive penalties fails to adequately respond to drug-related crime. This is because punitive measures fail to address the complex nature and causes underlying the commission of drug-related offences. It has been found that after release from prison, without accessible, integrated and consistent drug treatment and support such as access to housing and employment, people with substance use issues are at higher risk of re-offending and returning to prison, or dying from a drug overdose. A number of measures have been introduced which focus on addressing the factors underlying the commission of drug-related offences (ie PDDP, IDCD) which ultimately provides for early interventions prior to the formation of entrenched attitudes. Another measure is a bail based diversion program where, in the pre-sentencing stage, the offender is referred for treatment for their drug dependency. Some of the most common drug offences are for possession, use and supply of prohibited drugs. Each drug offence has specific legal 'elements ', which the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable…show more content…
The legal test for the prosecution is not what a reasonable person might or should think in the circumstances. The actual knowledge of the accused person must be proved. Knowledge can be inferred from the circumstances in which the drugs were discovered. If someone is apprehended with drugs on them, a court would probably reasonably infer that they had knowledge and control of those drugs. It is difficult for someone in this situation to escape the inference that they knew what was in their bag or sock or pockets. Similarly, where drugs are stored in a part of a house that is private (say, in a person 's bedroom) it is open to be inferred that they had possession of those drugs. The case of the leftover drugs A guest at a party left marijuana in a bathroom cupboard. During a raid some time later, a resident of the house told police that he knew the drugs were there and that he had intended to dump them. He was found not guilty of possession because he had laid no claim to the drugs and had exercised no control over them. Knowledge that the drugs were there was not enough (Solway v R (1984) 11 A Crim
Open Document