Understanding the Summary Jurisdiction in NSW
This thesis presents an analysis of the NSW summary criminal jurisdiction (the ‘summary jurisdiction’). The summary jurisdiction is a dynamic criminal justice apparatus where magistrates preside over the determination of liability for certain proscribed behaviours in the lower courts without the int...
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de documento: | Electrónico Libro |
| Lenguaje: | Inglés |
| Publicado: |
2017
|
| En: | Año: 2017 |
| Acceso en línea: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Verificar disponibilidad: | HBZ Gateway |
| Sumario: | This thesis presents an analysis of the NSW summary criminal jurisdiction (the ‘summary jurisdiction’). The summary jurisdiction is a dynamic criminal justice apparatus where magistrates preside over the determination of liability for certain proscribed behaviours in the lower courts without the intervention of a jury. My close analysis of the summary jurisdiction tells the previously little-known story of its development and offers a basis for critique. Adopting a socio-historical approach, this thesis offers a fresh analysis. At a broad level, change over time in the summary jurisdiction can be seen as following a trajectory of formalisation. I argue that ‘formalisation’ is a useful concept for understanding the historical development of the summary jurisdiction. It has four overlapping and interacting dimensions that assume differing degrees of significance at different times. Those dimensions are: juridification; rationalisation; professionalisation together with what I call ‘lawyerification’; and the separation of law from other spheres of social power. Formalisation has been a product of changing legitimation demands and attempts to increase the efficiency of the criminal law. Applying formalisation as a lens through which to view the development of the summary jurisdiction reveals how the summary jurisdiction has achieved the criminalisation of behaviours that have been constructed as harmful |
|---|