Jurisprudence means the knowledge or skills of the law . The law is basically described as an iceberg. Only one third of the laws are visible to us, the other two third are deep down, where it can’t be seen. Jurisprudence decides whether parts of the law are to be visible or not.
Jurisprudence deals as well with science and philosophy. An example for jurisprudence is the sexual predator law. The society and the lobbying government would like to introduce a new sexual predator law. This law would enable us to incarcerate sex predator indefinitely. This new law is now going through the matrix of jurisprudence. The matrix of jurisprudence has lots of concepts for the new law to be taken in to account for. In order for the sex predator law to be on the visible side of the iceberg, it has to go through the matrix of jurisprudence.
1. Social i.e. what the public thinks and react.
2. Economic i.e. do we have enough money to enforce this law?
3. Political i.e. what does the government think etc.
The sexual predator law should be introduced to the visible part of the iceberg, because this helps to protect people in their neighborhood. In the past there have been many cases to support this new law being develop. Counting back to the 80’s in 1981 there was a serial killer name Olsen, he killed 10 people. In 1990 Bernado/Hamoika sexually assaulted 20 people and killed 3 girls. In 1985 Fredricks who’s a pedophile and who killed and rape, nearly over 30 victims. The most recent case is Briere who killed a little girl name Holly Jones. The area that Holly Jones lived in was an area full of sexual offender within 200 km radius. The above psychopaths were all prosecuted and went to jail, however there were all released again, and unfortunately they re- committed their crimes. This has therefore aroused the public of their safeness. Pressure from the society occur which force politicians and the judicatory to change laws. Sexual predator should be incarcerated indefinitely.
However on the other side of this law, there are also many flaws. Economical Issues are one of the biggest problems. If the sexual predator law does get enforced, the government will have to spend much more money and time. This is because it will take time and money for the case trials.
Considering most sexual predator have no money, they will need help in hiring lawyers etc. If the sexual predator does get pledge guilty, the government will need to spend more money in jails i.e. to provide their foods etc. After the sexual predator has been pledge guilty, he/she will have right to appeal. This means more time, and money will be spent. Also another problem will occur. There will be an opportunity cost in economical terms. There will be an opportunity cost because sexual predator will take up the time for court trials and judges. This will therefore means other criminals such as robbers etc. won’t have a chance of being trial. If a case has been left for 24 months without being given a trial, the case will automatically closes itself. Which thus means government will have the hire more judges and build more court house for others criminals. Where does the government get the money from? Citizens of the cities will have to pay more tax. So therefore in economical terms, introducing the new sexual predator law is not wise.
According to the Canadian Chapter of rights and freedoms, each individual have the right arbitrarily detained or imprisoned. This means we have no right to incarcerated prisoners forever, just for one crime they did. We have to believe in rehabilitation, that each criminal will receive help to aid them back to become normal again. If the sexual predator law does enforce, this will take away the freedom of criminals of being rehabilitate, thus going against the Canadian chapter of rights and freedom. Also under the Canadian chapter of rights and freedom no.11 proceeding in criminal and penal matters part h) if final acquitted of the offence, not to be tried for it again, and if finally found guilty and punished for the offence not to be tried or punished for it again. This law means we cannot assume the criminal will do the act again and thus put them imprison forever. We can only put criminals in prison for what they have done and not what we think they will do in the future. The principle of jurisprudence on the sexual predator law is that criminal or suspects are “innocent until proven guilty? Therefore before each sex predator are proven to be guilty we have to believe them. This once again arouse the public, because if the government can now enforce such law to take away criminal freedoms, one day the government can enforce more laws to restrict even more freedom.
In the political side of jurisprudence, the sexual predator law shouldn’t be enforcing because the government thinks they already have a law that can put criminal in jail indefinitely. This is the Dangerous Offender Act. However to meet the criteria for the DOA is really hard.
– A pattern of repetitive and persistent behaviour that is likely to lead to injury or death, or a pattern of aggressive behaviour showing indifference to the safety of others;
– The likelihood of injury through a failure to control sexual impulses; or
– A crime so “brutal” that it is unlikely the offender can inhibit his or her behaviour in the future.
After looking at the flaws and strength the jurisprudence of the sexual predator law, I think the law should be to the visible part of the iceberg, in another words it should be enforced. Despite all economical factors, the law should still be enforce due to the safeness to the public. This is because of the jurisprudence concepts and factors. As mention above we have to take many things into account before deciding whether or not this law is to be visible. Referring back to the Canadian chapters of right and freedom, we have to consider the liberty, Rights and Justice, for our victims.
Liberty, we have the right to protect those who had been harm. Right, we have the right to ensure the safeness of our society. Justice, we have the right to make every single case a fairness case, and give the justice back to the victimes. Sex predators have to pay for the price for what they have done. Moreover, if we step and think of the criminal’s side we also have to give them liberty, rights and justice. By this we have to go back to our jurisprudence principle which is every suspects are innocent until they are proven guilty. Liberty/Rights, they have the right to be trust innocent, they also have the right of freedom and not to be incarcerates indefinitely.
In conclusion should the jurisprudence of sexual predator law should be to the visible side or not? After evaluating both sides, it is hard to determine, whether such law is to be enforce. However much more evidences goes towards the victims side, and thus I think the law should be enforce and to been seen on the visible side.