常识还是不必要的复杂性?最近新南威尔士州沉默权的变化

A. Cameron
{"title":"常识还是不必要的复杂性?最近新南威尔士州沉默权的变化","authors":"A. Cameron","doi":"10.21153/dlr2014vol19no2art345","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The New South Wales government has now enacted section 89A of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), which will significantly amend the right to silence. The new provision allows courts in certain circumstances to draw unfavourable inferences from evidence of silence in criminal proceedings. Parliament has justified the legislation as a ‘common sense’ approach, intended to prevent offenders hiding behind a wall of silence. However the benefits of the legislation are expected to be minimal at best. Although critics have already put forward weighty theoretical arguments opposing the enactment of the new provision, how it will operate in New South Wales courts remains to be seen. This article will undertake a detailed comparative analysis, examining the operation of similar legislation in the United Kingdom to determine how section 89A might be interpreted and applied in New South Wales. This analysis suggests that the need for extensive and complicated jury directions, the problems in determining whether the provision is to be invoked at all, and the complex test used in deciding whether it was reasonable for the accused to remain silent, will create significant difficulties in the application of section 89A. It is contended that the number and seriousness of these difficulties, coupled with the only limited benefit (if any) to be derived from the section, justify the close monitoring of section 89A and its review at an appropriate time.","PeriodicalId":43081,"journal":{"name":"Deakin Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Common Sense or Unnecessary Complexity? The Recent Change to the Right to Silence in New South Wales\",\"authors\":\"A. Cameron\",\"doi\":\"10.21153/dlr2014vol19no2art345\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The New South Wales government has now enacted section 89A of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), which will significantly amend the right to silence. The new provision allows courts in certain circumstances to draw unfavourable inferences from evidence of silence in criminal proceedings. Parliament has justified the legislation as a ‘common sense’ approach, intended to prevent offenders hiding behind a wall of silence. However the benefits of the legislation are expected to be minimal at best. Although critics have already put forward weighty theoretical arguments opposing the enactment of the new provision, how it will operate in New South Wales courts remains to be seen. This article will undertake a detailed comparative analysis, examining the operation of similar legislation in the United Kingdom to determine how section 89A might be interpreted and applied in New South Wales. This analysis suggests that the need for extensive and complicated jury directions, the problems in determining whether the provision is to be invoked at all, and the complex test used in deciding whether it was reasonable for the accused to remain silent, will create significant difficulties in the application of section 89A. It is contended that the number and seriousness of these difficulties, coupled with the only limited benefit (if any) to be derived from the section, justify the close monitoring of section 89A and its review at an appropriate time.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43081,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Deakin Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Deakin Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21153/dlr2014vol19no2art345\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Deakin Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21153/dlr2014vol19no2art345","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

新南威尔士州政府现在颁布了《1995年证据法》(NSW)第89A条,这将大大修改沉默权。新规定允许法院在某些情况下根据刑事诉讼中沉默的证据作出不利的推论。议会认为这项立法是一种“常识性”的做法,旨在防止罪犯躲在沉默之墙后面。然而,这项立法的好处预计最多也就微乎其微。尽管批评人士已经提出了大量反对新条款的理论论据,但它将如何在新南威尔士州的法院运作仍有待观察。本文将进行详细的比较分析,考察英国类似立法的运作情况,以确定第89A条在新南威尔士州如何解释和适用。这一分析表明,需要广泛而复杂的陪审团指示,在决定是否援引该条款方面存在的问题,以及在决定被告保持沉默是否合理时使用的复杂测试,将给第89A条的适用造成重大困难。有人认为,由于这些困难的数量和严重性,加上从这一节所能得到的唯一有限的好处(如果有的话),有理由密切监测第89A条,并在适当的时候进行审查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Common Sense or Unnecessary Complexity? The Recent Change to the Right to Silence in New South Wales
The New South Wales government has now enacted section 89A of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), which will significantly amend the right to silence. The new provision allows courts in certain circumstances to draw unfavourable inferences from evidence of silence in criminal proceedings. Parliament has justified the legislation as a ‘common sense’ approach, intended to prevent offenders hiding behind a wall of silence. However the benefits of the legislation are expected to be minimal at best. Although critics have already put forward weighty theoretical arguments opposing the enactment of the new provision, how it will operate in New South Wales courts remains to be seen. This article will undertake a detailed comparative analysis, examining the operation of similar legislation in the United Kingdom to determine how section 89A might be interpreted and applied in New South Wales. This analysis suggests that the need for extensive and complicated jury directions, the problems in determining whether the provision is to be invoked at all, and the complex test used in deciding whether it was reasonable for the accused to remain silent, will create significant difficulties in the application of section 89A. It is contended that the number and seriousness of these difficulties, coupled with the only limited benefit (if any) to be derived from the section, justify the close monitoring of section 89A and its review at an appropriate time.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Recommendations on the Optimal Constitutional Recognition of the First Nations in Australia Damages for Wrongful Fertilisation: Reliance on Policy Considerations ‘The Foundation of Choice of Law: Choice and Equality’ by Sagi Peari Dissonance in Global Financial Law The Peripatetic Nature of EU Corporate Tax Law
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1