Law Reform Essay Start (Yr 11) (1 Viewer)

[hsienerddd345]

So I've started my intro on my law reform essay. Here it is:

The notion “right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association” is only one of the many basic human rights each individual is entitled to. In reference to consorting however, there has been much controversy due to the ‘criminalisation’ of social interactions between people and its “extraordinarily broad nature” which relies upon police discretion to control their ‘scope.’ Objectively allowing for police to intervene along with preventing future offending, consorting laws in Australia; particularly NSW, have undergone a number of significant changes such as re-assessed severity of the crime, increased penalties and an extended definition just to name a few. Primarily surrounded by significant privacy concerns and the issue of warnings to a person’s associates, there is also a “disproportionately negative impact upon certain vulnerable groups” - Indigenous and young people. These hurdles undoubtedly inhibit the path to law reform in achieving justice and so the legislation in place to an extent, may not be as adequate as governing bodies may lead on.

The question is asking to 'assess the effectiveness of (chosen issue - in my case consorting laws) in achieving justice'.

Just need some insight on whether this intro is a good start or not/whether I'm going on the right track.

 

[jimmysmith560]

Your introduction is clear. You have established the essential/indispensable existence of normalised/basic human rights such as freedom of peaceful assembly and association as a general observation. You have also clearly suggested that consorting laws in Australia are subject to controversy/questioning and have provided a brief explanation in that regard, which is consistent with the main purpose of an introduction and introducing your chosen issue to be precise. I just have a suggestion regarding your wording near the start of your introduction:

You can change "In reference to consorting however, there has been much controversy due..." to something like "Consorting, however, has been a highly controversial matter due..."

Other than that, I believe your introduction is pretty good.

I hope this helps!

 

[zizi2003_]

So I've started my intro on my law reform essay. Here it is:

The notion “right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association” is only one of the many basic human rights each individual is entitled to. In reference to consorting however, there has been much controversy due to the ‘criminalisation’ of social interactions between people and its “extraordinarily broad nature” which relies upon police discretion to control their ‘scope.’ Objectively allowing for police to intervene along with preventing future offending, consorting laws in Australia; particularly NSW, have undergone a number of significant changes such as re-assessed severity of the crime, increased penalties and an extended definition just to name a few. Primarily surrounded by significant privacy concerns and the issue of warnings to a person’s associates, there is also a “disproportionately negative impact upon certain vulnerable groups” - Indigenous and young people. These hurdles undoubtedly inhibit the path to law reform in achieving justice and so the legislation in place to an extent, may not be as adequate as governing bodies may lead on.

The question is asking to 'assess the effectiveness of (chosen issue - in my case consorting laws) in achieving justice'.

Just need some insight on whether this intro is a good start or not/whether I'm going on the right track.

You need to explicitly state in your thesis whether the consorting laws are "ineffective" or "highly/undeniably effective" or "somewhat/moderately effective". I'm also unsure of your stance (you appear to be digressing)- teachers always want to see those key words I mentioned to understand the direction your essay is taking.

You are also being informal at times in your intro - phrases like "just to name a few" don't really work well. I would also suggest writing in active voice for Legal (makes it easier for your marker, passive only works best in English).
In terms of your argument itself, I'd suggest also bringing in the unjust police treatment of bikies (Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs) (thus, misuse of police discretion) under the consorting laws. I remember there was a good Ombudsman report on this argument (I had this as one of my arguments for my y11 reform essay in prelims for which I received full marks)

Also, make sure you explicitly address the 'in achieving justice' part. Make sure that in your essay planning, you write about WHAT is 'justice', for WHOM 'justice' is achieved, and HOW it is achieved. For example, something like "consorting laws are highly ineffective in achieving just outcomes for the Bikies as their right to be presumed 'innocent until proven guilty' is violated, as seen in... Nevertheless, justice is achieved for society as potential crimes are deterred/well regulated, thus protecting society's security. Indeed, tension exists in balancing the rights of society and the accused as seen in...rendering law reform as only somewhat effective in achieving justice for all parties..."