skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 50317 Find in a Library
Title: GUM-TREE JUSTICE - ABORIGINES AND THE COURTS (FROM AUSTRALIAN JUSTICE SYSTEM, 2D ED., 1977, BY DUNCAN CHAPPELL AND PAUL WILSON - SEE NCJ-50316)
Author(s): M W DAUNTON-FEAR; A FREIBERG
Corporate Author: Butterworth
Canada
Date Published: 1977
Page Count: 55
Sponsoring Agency: Butterworth
Scarborough, Ontario M1P 451, Canada
Type: Historical Overview
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: Australia
Annotation: THE ROLE OF THE CRIMINAL LAW IN A PLURALIST SOCIETY IS EXAMINED, AND PRINCIPLES INVOLVED IN THE SENTENCING OF TRADITIONALLY ORIENTED ABORIGINES ARE CONSIDERED, ALONG WITH PROPOSALS FOR RESOLVING THE PROBLEMS INDICATED.
Abstract: THE EVOLVING ASPECTS OF LEGAL PLURALSIM IN AUSTRALIA, ATTEMPTS TO MITIGATE THE HARSHNESS OF THE LAW, THE AIMS AND FUNCTIONS OF THE CRIMINAL LAW WITH REGARD TO THE ABORIGINES, ATTITUDES OF THE COURTS TOWARD SENTENCING, DEFICIENCIES OF THE SENTENCING PROCESS AS A MITIGATOR, AND SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS ARE THE MAJOR TOPICS CONSIDERED. THE RIGHT OF GROUPS TO RETAIN AND ACT WITHIN IDENTIFIABLE CULTURAL TRADITIONS WITHOUT FEAR OF PUNISHMENT WHERE THEIR VALUES CONFLICT WITH THE CENTRALIST LAW OF THE DOMINANT CULTURE IS THE GENERAL ISSUE CONSIDERED AND HOW THE CENTRALIST LEGAL SYSTEM OF AUSTRALIA HAS TRIED TO DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE ARE IDENTIFIED AND DISCUSSED. WHILE MAINTAINING THE JURISDICTION OF THE CENTRALIST LEGAL SYSTEM OVER THE BEHAVIOR OF ABORIGINES, EFFORTS TO MITIGATE THE HARSHNESS OF THE LAW HAVE BEEN TRIED THROUGH THE USE OF TEMPERED SENTENCING, CONSIDERATIONS OF PROVOCATION, SELF-DEFENSE, DURESS, AND INSANITY AND AUTOMATISM. THE FLAWS IN EACH OF THESE DEVICES ARE INDICATED. WHETHER OR NOT THE LAW IS INTENDED TO FORCE THE ASSIMILATION OF VARIOUS DIVERGENT GROUPS IN A SOCIETY INTO THE MAINSTREAM OF CULTURAL NORMS OR TO HELP PRESERVE TRADITIONAL VALUES WITHIN DIVERSE GROUPS AGAINST BEING OVERWHELMED BY MAJORITY DICTATES IS CONSIDERED. ASSUMING THE DESIRABILITY OF THE LATTER OBJECTIVE, VARIOUS EFFORTS TO USE THE LAW TO ALLOW THE EXERCISE OF IDENTIFIABLE ETHNIC CUSTOMS WITHOUT SANCTION ARE DISCUSSED. THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF TRIBAL COURTS ARE GIVEN PARTICULAR ATTENTION. (RCB)
Index Term(s): Australia; Laws and Statutes; Minorities; Tribal history
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=50317

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.