The primary goal of this assignment is to create an essay that compares and contrasts the criminal justice systems in Malaysia and Australia. The system in which a specific Country is governed by a set of laws or policies is referred to as a criminal justice tradition.
This essay also explains some of the parallels between Malaysian and Australian legal practices. It was necessary to concentrate on a specific criminal justice tradition in order to comprehend their similarities and differences. Based on this situation, the primary source for criminal justice practice was "Capital Punishment." Capital Punishment refers to the process of killing someone (Binder & Weisberg & Fissell, 2017). It is done as a punishment for committing a crime/offence (Binder & Weisberg & Fissell, 2017). This type of punishment is also known as a death penalty. Each Country has its own rules and policies; in case they are broken, certain consequences have to be met. Capital punishment in Malaysia is very common.
This form of punishment became mandatory since the year 2003 (Jewkes & Crewe & Bennett, 2016). High Courts have the final verdict/jurisdiction in relation to this form of punishment. It is important to note that this form of punishment does not exist in every Country. Some Countries have replaced this form of punishment with a life imprisonment.
When we look at Australia; a compared to Malaysia, Capital Punishment is no longer active (Leechaianan & Longmire, 2013). This form of punishment was fully abolished in the year 1968. It was abolished due to pressure from international organizations. The aim of most of this organizations is to preserve the lives of the Human generation. The last form of this punishment was executed in the year 1967 (Cavadino & Dignan, 2006). The last person to be hung was an individual known as Ronald Ryan.
He lived in between the years of 1925, February 21 – February 3rd 1967 (Cavadino & Dignan, 2006). Ryan was executed after being found guilty of killing a warder known as George Hudson. The other difference between Malaysia and Australia is the fact that this form of punishment is also uncommon among the people of Australia. Only people who were born in the 19th Century can relate to this punishment (Cavadino & Dignan, 2006). Lastly, Capital Punishment is not mandatory in Australia.
As opposed to Australia, some of the acts in Malaysia that may lead to Capital Punishment include treason, drug trafficking, murder and waging any form of violence/war against the King; The current King of Malaysia is Yang di – Pertuan Agong (Atkinson, 2016). It also includes any acts that promote or are related with terrorism. Other minor offences that may lead to capital punishment are robbery, kidnapping and burglary (Hood & Hoyle, 2015). Trafficking of weapons and attempted self-murder. It is important to note that the only people who can be pardoned are women who are pregnant and minors (Hood & Hoyle, 2015). Pregnant Women caught committing either of the acts above are sentenced to life imprisonment.
In Australia, before Capital Punishment was abolished, some of the acts that led to death penalties are manslaughter, sexual and Physical assaults (Miller & Hefner, 2015). Other minor acts included stealing of sheep, cattle and other types of livestock. Unlike Malaysia, acts such as treason and trafficking of drugs did not entitle one to get a death penalty (Harris, 2013). As compared to Malaysia, the level of Jurisdiction that existed in the Australian Government was not strong. Every individual caught committing any of the acts above was sentenced to death. This means that pregnant women and minors were not spared.
Another difference between the Australian and Malaysian Criminal Justice tradition is based on the living conditions of prisoners/offenders (Binder & Weisberg & Fissell, 2017). Most of the prisoners in Malaysia that deserve Capital Punishment are forced to live in inhumane conditions. They are forced to live in facilities that are poorly constructed. Most of this facilities have poor sanitation standards (Binder & Weisberg & Fissell, 2017). They have less access to medical care, food and clothing. In Australia; prisoners/offenders that deserved a death penalty were not forced to live in inhumane conditions. They had access to facilities that had proper sanitation standards; good food, clothing and medical car (Jewkes & Crewe & Bennett, 2016)e. They were treated with humane conditions until they prosecuted.
As opposed to Malaysia, a considerable number of the population in Australia did not consider Capital Punishment as the right form of Judgement (Laskowska, 2014). Most Australians reasoned with the fact that there are Countries that do not have any form of death penalties yet the level/rate of reported cases based on murders and homicides is very low (Miller & Hefner, 2015). This is one of the main reasons that made Australia to abolish Capital punishment. When we look at Malaysia, a considerable number of the population believes that Capital Punishment is the best form of penalty. They believe this form of penalty instills fear and has constantly reduced the rates/reported cases of crime (Miller & Hefner, 2015). Recent surveys have shown that Capital Punishment shaped the society of Malaysia.
There also exists a difference between Malaysia and Australian Criminal Justice traditions in the sense that Capital Punishment is overused in Malaysia (McCafferty, 2017). According to the Malaysian constitution; all offenses attract a death penalty (Wood & Gannon, 2013). This means that no offence is greater or less than the other. All offenses whether murder or robbery attract a death penalty. In Australia, the tradition on the Capital form of punishment was meant for serious offences such as murder, homicide and sexual assaults (Sarre & Prenzler, 2014). Petty crimes such as theft and burglary were not compensated with a death penalty.
The last difference between the criminal justice traditions based on Capital Punishment is related to the burden of proof. In this case, the Malaysian Government is very strict and reluctant (Binder & Weisberg & Fissell, 2017). They do not care about the life of the accused. According to the traditions of this Country; the accused is supposed to prove their innocence. They are tied on a positon where they have to fight for their right to life by looking for any evidence that can be used to prove they are not guilty as proven (Jewkes & Crewe & Bennett, 2016). In Australia, the accused are not left with the burden to prove whether they are guilty or not. They are allowed to work with intermediates known as lawyers. The work of the Lawyers is to work with the accused (Cavadino & Dignan, 2006). They are also responsible for looking for any form of evidence that may be used to plea the innocence of the accused.
Underlying Similarities
Despite the fact that Malaysia and Australia have a wide range of differences based on Criminal Justice traditions. It is safe to state the fact this traditions also have some underlying similarities. An example of a similarity is the fact that in both Countries, there are some acts that entitle the accused Capital Punishment. Such acts include Murder and terrorism (Leechaianan & Longmire, 2013). Before Australia abolished the death penalty; murder, terrorism and activities related to terrorism were considered as huge offenses (Binder & Weisberg & Fissell, 2017). The same case applies to Malaysia. Therefore; based on this instance, it is safe to say the fact both Malaysia and Australia have some sort of similarity when it comes to judging offenders based on their offence.
The other similarity between Capital Punishment in Malaysia and Australia is the fact that in both Countries this tradition is/was used respectively to achieve a certain goal or objective (Laskowska, 2014). Both Malaysia and Australia use Capital Punishment to maintain law and order. This tradition is also used to regulate the behaviors of people in the society (Miller & Hefner, 2015). Based on this scenario, it is safe to state the fact that the traditions of both Malaysia and Australia share an underlying similarity. This similarity entails the fact that Capital Punishment is used to maintain law and order as well as regulate the behaviors of different people.
In both Countries, Capital Punishment/death penalties are determined or jurisdicted by the High Court (Binder & Weisberg & Fissell, 2017). The Court of appeal is used in instances where the accused would like to challenge the verdict that is made in the High Court. However, in most instances the High Court gives the last opinion/jurisdiction (Binder & Weisberg & Fissell, 2017). Another similarity between the traditions of this forms of Government is the fact that amnesty against a person who is accused may be given the head of the state (Jewkes & Crewe & Bennett, 2016). He or she also has the right/power to abolish or declare this form of punishment.
Lastly, there is an underlying similarity on how the accused were killed in Australia and how they are killed in Malaysia (Leechaianan & Longmire, 2013). In most cases, those who are found by the High Court are executed with death penalties that include electrocution and hanging which is the most common (Hood & Hoyle, 2015). Other forms of death penalties that were/are used respectively include the use of lethal injections, firing with ammunitions such as guns and the use of gas (Leechaianan & Longmire, 2013). This are just but examples of some of the acceptable death penalties that are used in Australia and Malaysia.
CONCLUSION
In the past, Capital Punishment was one of the most common forms of punishment. Most Countries had adopted this form of criminal justice tradition. Today, most Countries have abolished this system of tradition. Most of the Countries that practice this form of punishment are in the Middle East.
As discussed in the essay above; the Australian and Malaysian Government have a big difference in terms of their criminal Justice traditions. The form of Capital Punishment that existed in Australia is very different as compared to that in Malaysia. However, this does not mean that they did not have any similarities. Based on this essay, it is evident that as much as criminal justice traditions may be different from one another, they have some sort of similarities and interconnections.
References
Atkinson, A. (2016). The Europeans in Australia: Volume One-The Beginning. UNSW Press.
Binder, G., Weisberg, R., & Fissell, B. M. (2017). Capital punishment of unintentional felony murder.
Cavadino, M. and Dignan, J. (2006b). Penal policy and political economy. Criminology and Criminal Justice 6, 435–56.
Cunneen, C. (2014). Colonial processes, indigenous peoples, and criminal justice systems.
Harris, B. (2013). a new constitution for Australia. Routledge.
Hood, R., & Hoyle, C. (2015). The death penalty: A worldwide perspective. OUP Oxford.
Jewkes, Y., Crewe, B., & Bennett, J. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook on prisons. Routledge.
Laskowska, M. (2014). On Death Penalty-To Let Die or Not to Let Die?.
Leechaianan, Y., & Longmire, D. R. (2013). The use of the death penalty for drug trafficking in the United States, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand: A comparative legal analysis. Laws, 2(2), 115-149.
McCafferty, J. A. (2017). Capital punishment. Routledge.
Miller, S. L., & Hefner, M. K. (2015). Procedural justice for victims and offenders?: Exploring restorative justice processes in Australia and the US. Justice Quarterly, 32(1), 142-167.
Reggio, M. H. (2014). History of the death penalty. Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 2277-2285.
Sarre, R. T., & Prenzler, T. (2014). The criminal justice system.
Schabas, W. A. (2016). Human rights treaties and capital punishment
Wood, J., & Gannon, T. A. (Eds.). (2013). Public Opinion and Criminal Justice: Context, Practice and Values. Routledge.
