Right To Procedural Fairness
The law is a system of rules, usually enforced through a set of institutions. Laws can shape of reflect society, economics or politics, and are based upon morals, ethics and values of the society the law is inflicted upon.
Naturally, each individual in the society have responsibilities that they must take on. In regards to law, for example, each individual has the responsibility to have an understanding of the rule of law. Whereas, in regards to law, an individual has the right to procedural fairness and access to the law. So, what are the rights and responsibilities of individuals really?
The rule of law is that no one is above the law. Aristotle claimed that the rule of law is above any rule of the individual. For example: a policeman …show more content…
After the allegations were made, the police took Patrick into custody, and before his parents arrived at the station, their son had already been arrested. Without any evidence against him, only the word of a teenage girl, 15 year old Patrick was being treated like a criminal. The Waring family found that the legal system of WA were not acting justly, and rather had to turn to a private investigator. This in itself tells us of the unjust treatment Patrick was receiving, and how the Waring family felt that they weren’t being heard by the legal system; the cardinal rule of procedural fairness. The Waring family did have a defence team, but procedural fairness outlines the fair and just treatment of both parties. It is believed that Patrick may have been treated this way due to his gender and age. Stereotype tells society that a teenage boy is the perfect criminal to fit a case involving rape. The second rule of procedural fairness outlines that an individual should be treated without bias. Before any investigations had been made, the DPP assumed that Patrick Waring was guilty. Is this bias? On the night of the arrest, Patrick was not clearly informed of his alleged crime, and was not given a chance to respond to them. The DPP intentionally cornered Patrick and made sure that his parents were unable to be beside him while he was being questioned. Is this procedural fairness? The whole case was one of ‘he said, she said’. The DPP believed every word spoken by the girl, and didn’t think to collect evidence before arresting
Naturally, each individual in the society have responsibilities that they must take on. In regards to law, for example, each individual has the responsibility to have an understanding of the rule of law. Whereas, in regards to law, an individual has the right to procedural fairness and access to the law. So, what are the rights and responsibilities of individuals really?
The rule of law is that no one is above the law. Aristotle claimed that the rule of law is above any rule of the individual. For example: a policeman …show more content…
After the allegations were made, the police took Patrick into custody, and before his parents arrived at the station, their son had already been arrested. Without any evidence against him, only the word of a teenage girl, 15 year old Patrick was being treated like a criminal. The Waring family found that the legal system of WA were not acting justly, and rather had to turn to a private investigator. This in itself tells us of the unjust treatment Patrick was receiving, and how the Waring family felt that they weren’t being heard by the legal system; the cardinal rule of procedural fairness. The Waring family did have a defence team, but procedural fairness outlines the fair and just treatment of both parties. It is believed that Patrick may have been treated this way due to his gender and age. Stereotype tells society that a teenage boy is the perfect criminal to fit a case involving rape. The second rule of procedural fairness outlines that an individual should be treated without bias. Before any investigations had been made, the DPP assumed that Patrick Waring was guilty. Is this bias? On the night of the arrest, Patrick was not clearly informed of his alleged crime, and was not given a chance to respond to them. The DPP intentionally cornered Patrick and made sure that his parents were unable to be beside him while he was being questioned. Is this procedural fairness? The whole case was one of ‘he said, she said’. The DPP believed every word spoken by the girl, and didn’t think to collect evidence before arresting