JUDGES, GUNS AND MONEY

There has been a lot of angst lately about the severity (or lack of it) in sentencing by the judiciary.

The fact is that when it comes to drug traffickers. I think the judiciary is not yet being tough enough. But it's probably not their fault.

Judges have to look beyond just punishment to rehabilitation, remorse and the likelihood of the person re-offending.

But some account must be taken of community expectations. The community is a victim and is entitled to have its sense of justice taken into account.

When it comes to drug traffickers, it is possible to separate those who traffick for profit and those who traffick to support an addiction.

Traffickers caught with commercial quantities are out to make huge profits regardless of the death and misery they cause.

The Liberal Party has adopted a policy of hitting traffickers where it hurts -- their bank accounts.

First, it recommends minimum sentencing for these evil people. That is not mandatory sentencing, but if a judge wishes to give less than the minimum the case must be exceptional.

Second, the judge will be given the power not only to confiscate the assets associated with the crime, but all the traffickers assets -- these assets to be used to trace further assets and to help victims caught in the trafficker's web.

Finally, the Judge may fix a period after the sentence has been completed during which nominated agencies such as the drug squad and the tax office may have immediate access to the trafficker's bank accounts and books of account.

Gilbert and Sullivan got it right: "Let the punishment fit the crime."

Dr Robert Dean