Effectiveness? (1 Viewer)

[KiahDoulman]

I have just gotten an essay to write for Legal Studies and the topic is: As part of the criminal trial process assess the use of defences to criminal charges in achieving justice.

Effectiveness is basically this whole essay, yet I am so confused as to what it means by "effectiveness". Can someone please explain it for me?

 

[seventhroot]

How well is it working.

Do you have Newell?

 

[wishingstars]

Effectiveness is, in simple terms, how well something works.
For example, in legal, when you compare international law and domestic law, you could talk about how quite often, domestic law can be considered quite effective as opposed to international law, primarily due to its enforceability and the binding nature of statute law (something alone those lines).
As your question is asking you to "assess" how defences can achieve justice, just delve into different types of defences - you have your complete defences [as there are so many split them into paragraphs - e.g. PARAGRAPH ONE: duress & necessity & PARAGRAPH TWO: insanity & self-defence etc...] as well as partial defences (i.e. diminished responsibility + provocation].
When you talk about achieving justice, think about it from different views (i.e. not only justice for the victims but perhaps also the wider community - maybe even the suspect themselves (i.e. are their rights being upheld?)

In relation to how you would assess effectiveness - you could just focus on cases & legislation - if they are achieving justice, state that they do indeed increase effectiveness of the criminal trial process and if not, say the opposite.

I hope that helps

 

[Myans]

Effectiveness questions are asking a student to make a judgement as to whether the system is working well or not.

Something can only be considered “effective” or “ineffective” if it is evaluated based on some sort of objective criteria, or factors. There are a variety of effectiveness criterion by which to evaluate, but the most useful guide is the RAEPE and RROB acronyms (they are two crimes – which makes it easy to remember!)

Use the RAEPE criteria when evaluating whether the law is effective for individuals
R = Resource Efficiency
A = Accessibility
E = Equality
P = Protection of individual Rights
E = Enforcement

Use the RROB criteria when evaluating for whether the law is effective for the community
R = Resource Efficiency
R = Reflection of Community standards of justice
O = Opportunities for Appeal, Review
B = Balance of rights between Individual and Community

You do not need to EVERY criterion in your evaluation; rather, use the factors that would be most relevant to the example. For example, defences wouldn't so much involve problems with equality (individual).

If you need an example, here's a sample from my Jury's notes. “… The Jury Amendment (Verdicts) Act (2006) NSW now allows for majority verdicts of 11-1 and 10-1 to erode impact of rogue jurors. In recommending this reform, the NSW Law Reform Commission 2005 “Jury Report 111” observed that the reform will lead to quicker and more readily accessible verdicts, is consistent with civil jury proceedings and other Australian state practices, and thus is an effective reflection of community standards of justice…”

Good luck!