Many of us can find comfort in the thought that our society is one that believes in a person’s innocence until proven guilty. It is a presumption in our legal system. When charged with any criminal offence, the burden of proof rests on the Crown to prove your guilt beyond reasonable doubt. You are entitled to be silent and are not required to present a defence. Over recent years however, the legislature has passed laws that systematically contradict that presumption. One clear area is the current legislation dealing with Bail.
What is bail?
Bail is conditional liberty. You have been charged with an offence yet you have your freedom until you are tried for the offence(s) you have been charged with.
Bail history in NSW
For decades since the late 1970s to 2014, bail decisions in NSW were made pursuant to the Bail Act 1978 (NSW). This statute was the result of a report made in 1976 by the Bail Review Committee. This Committee had recommended a general right be created, that gave bail for all offences not punishable by imprisonment, and a presumption in favour of bail for all imprisonable offences. Over the years however, incremental changes were made to make bail harder to obtain. For example, a high profile case regarding an armed robbery, an exception to the presumption of bail for armed and violent robbery offences were made. Overtime, the presumption in favor of bail for those accused of possession or supply of commercial quantities of prohibited drugs was also removed. Amendments were made to the Bail Act to make bail harder to obtain.
After a review conducted by the NSW Law Reform Commission in 2013, the Bail Act 1978 (NSW) was replaced with the Bail Act 2013 (NSW), which came into effect on 20 May 2014. We shall explain what the presumption in favour of bail has been replaced with. The first hurdle to determining bail is if the offence you have been charged with is a show cause offence.
Show cause offences
When you are charged with a criminal offence, some offences under the Bail Act are defined as show cause offences. A show cause offence means that you, the accused, have to show why your imprisonment isn’t justified. So you could show the weakness in the Crown’s case against you, or that there are preventable delays in you getting a final hearing, or that you have urgent personal circumstances and require medical treatment. If you don’t have any sufficient justifications, you will be refused bail. You will be subjected to imprisonment, which is the penalty of last resort of our legal system. You haven’t been convicted of a single crime, you are still legally innocent at this stage. If you don’t think this is concerning, understand that it isn’t common for someone to spend over a year in jail waiting for their hearing. And don’t assume you are entitled to any form of compensation automatically either.
Section 16B of the Bail Act lists the show cause offences which include:
Show cause offences are essentially your most serious criminal offences.
Now, assuming the offence you have been charged with isn’t a show cause offence, or you can prove why your imprisonment isn’t justified, you still have more hurdles. Next step is to address any bail concerns.
Section 17 of the Bail Act states:
A bail authority must, before making a bail decision, assess any bail concerns. For the purposes of this Act, a bail concern is a concern that an accused person, if released from custody, will-
When making a determination under Section 17 of the Bail Act, the bail authority can only consider a variety of matters listed in Section 18 of the Bail Act.
Such matters include:
(a) the accused person’s background, including criminal history, circumstances and community ties,
(b) the nature and seriousness of the offence,
(c) the strength of the prosecution case,
(d) whether the accused person has a history of violence,
(e) whether the accused person has previously committed a serious offence while on bail
There are other matters for the bail authority to consider listed in that Section. If the bail authority finds that there is an unacceptable risk of you being on bail, then bail must be refused. The bail authority can decide, if it finds there are unacceptable risks of you being on bail, to impose bail conditions that you are required to comply with. Yet even this conditional form of liberty, whilst obviously being better than imprisonment, flies in the face of the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. When you bear in mind that the high conviction rate in NSW (approximately 90% of defendants in NSW were found guilty of at least one criminal offence in 2017), and the very finite resources of Legal Aid, this does not inspire hope for those accused of criminal offences. Especially those who come from disadvantaged groups within society.
Wengi wetu tunaweza kupata faraja katika wazo kwamba jamii yetu ni moja ambayo inaamini katika mtu asiye na hatia mpaka kuthibitishwa hatia. Ni dhana katika mfumo wetu wa kisheria. Wakati kushtakiwa kwa kosa lolote la jinai, mzigo wa uthibitisho unakaa juu ya Taji kuthibitisha hatia yako zaidi ya shaka ya busara. Una haki ya kukaa kimya na hauhitaji kutoa utetezi. Hata hivyo, katika miaka ya hivi karibuni, bunge limepitisha sheria ambazo zinapingana na dhana hiyo. Eneo moja wazi ni sheria ya sasa inayohusu Bail. Ukombozi ni nini? Dhamana ni uhuru wenye masharti. Ikiwa umeshtakiwa kwa kosa, bado una uhuru wako hadi utakapohukumiwa kwa kosa ambalo umeshtakiwa. Kwa miaka mingi tangu mwishoni mwa miaka ya 1970 hadi 2014, maamuzi ya dhamana katika NSW yalifanywa kwa mujibu wa Sheria ya Bail ya 1978. Sheria hiyo ilitokana na ripoti iliyotolewa mwaka 1976 na Kamati ya Uhakiki wa Bail. Kamati hiyo ilipendekeza kuundwa kwa haki ya jumla, ambayo ilitoa dhamana kwa makosa yote ambayo hayakuhukumiwa kwa kifungo cha jela, na dhana kwa niaba ya dhamana kwa makosa yote yanayoweza kufungwa. Hata hivyo, kwa miaka mingi, mabadiliko ya hatua kwa hatua yalifanywa ili kufanya iwe vigumu kupata dhamana. Kwa mfano, kesi ya juu kuhusu wizi wa silaha, ubaguzi kwa dhana ya dhamana kwa ajili ya uhalifu wa wizi wa silaha na vurugu ulifanywa. Kwa muda mrefu, dhana ya kuwa na haki ya kutolewa kwa dhamana kwa wale walioshtakiwa kwa kumiliki au kutoa kiasi cha kibiashara cha dawa za kulevya zilizopigwa marufuku pia iliondolewa. Marekebisho yalifanywa kwenye Sheria ya Bail ili kufanya iwe vigumu kupata dhamana. Baada ya uchunguzi uliofanywa na Tume ya Marekebisho ya Sheria ya NSW mnamo 2013, Sheria ya Bail ya 1978 ilibadilishwa na Sheria ya Bail ya 2013 ambayo ilianza kutumika mnamo Mei 20, 2014. Tutaeleza nini dhana kwa niaba ya dhamana imebadilishwa na. Kizuizi cha kwanza cha kuamua dhamana ni ikiwa kosa ambalo umeshtakiwa ni kosa la kuonyesha sababu. "Kama mtu anashtakiwa kwa kosa la jinai, baadhi ya makosa chini ya Sheria ya Bail hufafanuliwa kama ""uhalifu wa kuonyesha sababu.""" Uhalifu wa kuonyesha sababu unamaanisha kwamba wewe, mshtakiwa, lazima uonyeshe kwa nini kifungo chako hakina haki. Kwa hivyo unaweza kuonyesha udhaifu katika kesi ya Crown dhidi yako, au kwamba kuna ucheleweshaji unaoweza kuzuiwa katika kupata usikilizaji wa mwisho, au kwamba una hali za haraka za kibinafsi na unahitaji matibabu. Kama huna sababu za kutosha, utapuuzwa dhamana. Utakabiliwa na kifungo cha gerezani, ambacho ni adhabu ya mwisho ya mfumo wetu wa kisheria. Wewe si kuwa hatia ya uhalifu mmoja, wewe bado kisheria hatia katika hatua hii. Kama huoni hii ni ya wasiwasi, kuelewa kwamba si kawaida kwa mtu kutumia zaidi ya mwaka katika jela kusubiri kwa ajili ya kusikilizwa yao. Na usidhani wewe ni haki ya aina yoyote ya fidia moja kwa moja ama. "Sehemu ya 16 ya Sheria ya Bail inaorodhesha ""Hakuna sababu ya kuonyesha"" makosa ambayo ni pamoja na: ""Hakuna sababu ya kuonyesha"" makosa ni kimsingi makosa yako makubwa ya jinai." Sasa, kwa kudhani kosa ambalo umeshtakiwa si kosa la kuonyesha sababu, au unaweza kuthibitisha kwa nini kifungo chako hakina haki, bado una vizuizi zaidi. Hatua inayofuata ni kushughulikia wasiwasi wowote wa dhamana. "Katika kifungu cha 17 cha Sheria ya Bail, mamlaka ya Bail lazima, kabla ya kufanya uamuzi wa dhamana, itathmini wasiwasi wowote wa dhamana. """ "Kwa madhumuni ya Sheria hii, ""mwisho wa dhamana"" ni wasiwasi kwamba mtuhumiwa, ikiwa ataachiliwa kutoka kwa kizuizini, atafanya uamuzi chini ya kifungu cha 17 cha Sheria ya Bail, mamlaka ya dhamana inaweza tu kuzingatia mambo mbalimbali yaliyoorodheshwa katika kifungu cha 18 cha Sheria ya Bail." "Hii inahusisha: (a) historia ya mtuhumiwa, ikiwa ni pamoja na historia ya uhalifu, hali na uhusiano wa jamii; (b) asili na uzito wa kosa; (c) nguvu ya kesi ya mashtaka; (d) kama mtuhumiwa ana historia ya vurugu; (e) kama mtuhumiwa amefanya uhalifu mkubwa wakati wa dhamana; (e) ""Hii ni suala la mamlaka ya kuzingatia dhamana.""" Ikiwa mamlaka ya dhamana inagundua kuwa kuna hatari isiyoweza kukubaliwa ya kuwa huru, basi dhamana lazima ikataliwa. Mamlaka ya dhamana inaweza kuamua, ikiwa inagundua kuna hatari zisizokubalika za kuwa na dhamana, kuweka masharti ya dhamana ambayo unapaswa kufuata. Hata hivyo, hata aina hii ya uhuru wa masharti, wakati wazi kuwa bora kuliko kifungo, kuruka katika uso wa dhana ya kutokuwa na hatia mpaka kuthibitishwa hatia. Kwa kuzingatia kiwango cha juu cha hukumu ya hatia huko NSW (karibu 90% ya washtakiwa huko NSW walipatikana na hatia ya kosa moja la jinai mnamo 2017) na rasilimali za mwisho za Msaada wa Kisheria, hii haitoi matumaini kwa wale walioshtakiwa kwa makosa ya jinai. Hasa wale wanaotoka katika vikundi visivyo na faida katika jamii.