A very good__, I bid to Mr/Madam speaker, honourable adjudicators, just time keepers, Members of the opposition and Members of the house. Ladies and gentlemen,
I could not help but to listen to the opposition leader’s feeble argument. I could not help to notice that how the opposition has a fragmented view whereby they said that PAROLE SYSTERM DOES NOT INJUSTICE TO THE VICTIM OF CRIMES. The opposition leader said that______________, as a matter of fact__________. In addition to his rebuttal, I also wish to point out that the government stands by the definition presented by the Prime Minister in spite of how the opposition leader has tried to twist the words in their definition of the motion. We, the government do not see that as true and relevant. Now I have cleared the air of “confusion” caused by the opposition, kindly allow me to reaffirm the government’s stand before I continue with my case. THE PAROLE SYSTEM IMPOSES INJUSTICE TO VICTIMS OF CRIMES AS IT IS INTERVENING WITH HOW JUSTICE IS SUPPOSED TO BE SERVED ACCORDINGLY. THE PAROLE SYSTEM ACTS AS A LENIENCY THAT FAVOURS INMATES AND FORSAKING CRIME VICTIMS. Ladies and gentlemen,
Our Prime minister has confidently put forward our first argument. Now kindly allow me to present another two arguments from the government. My first argument is THROUGH THE PAROLE SYSTEM, CRIME OFFENDERS ARE NOT PUNISHED SUFFICIENTLY FOR THE CRIMES THEY HAVE COMMITTED AND THIS IS UNFAIR TO THE VICTIMS. Ladies and gentlemen,
It is clear that victims of crimes are frequently disappointed by the parole system and can feel alienated and sometimes further victimized by the criminal justice process. It is also the case that victims of crime can feel extremely angry, traumatized and distressed about the crime and the parole given to their offender.The parole system portrays how soft the justice system is on criminals and unfair to victims of...