Until now, laws have become increasingly complicated as their authors attempt to cover all possibilities and close all loopholes. This is not practical. It makes the laws hard to understand, and the more complex they become, the more likely it is that lawyers will find loopholes.
Any laws the CSSP puts before parliament will read something like: “Stealing is a crime”
Then we shall let the judges interpret and judge. Let them use their very powerful brains to get it right, rather than have their hands tied behind their backs by enthusiastic amateurs who have been elected to represent the people.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Unnecessary laws will be wiped off the books. Comical examples include the requirement of hackney carriage (taxi) drivers to carry hay for the horse. And there are many laws that have never been used, or have nor been used in the modern era. Let’s get rid of them.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Any new laws will be in plain English.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
The CSSP does not really want to make any laws if it can help it. Where there is a need for a law, we would consider making it a European law rather than a British one. This is on the basis that, if it such a great idea, then surely all of Europe would benefit from it. If we can’t sell the idea far and wide, perhaps it’s not so great after all, in which case, why have it. (There will of course be exceptions to this logic.)
It is clear that there are too many people in prison, and that long sentences are not an effective deterrent to the criminal.
For the less serious crimes, we have to find punishments other than prison. For vandalism, we could think about ways to shame the individual, so that he/she is less likely to re-offend. Not quite the stocks, but to be hand-cuffed or otherwise secured in a public place with a notice there describing what the culprit has done. There would be no physical pain, or throwing of eggs and fruit. But it should be such a shaming and unpleasant experience that he/she would think twice next time.
Where prison is the appropriate sentence, then the sentence will be made in three parts:
Firstly there is the sentence for punishment, which should satisfy public demand for punishment. During the punishment phase, the regime would not include many comforts. Food would be basic but balanced and nourishing. This would be accompanied by water. There would be no television, no smoking, no drugs, and no mobile phones. The making of this phase more punishing would allow for shorter sentences to have the same impact as current practice. But it would be cheaper. And hopefully more deterring.
On completion of the punishment phase, then would begin the public safety and the rehabilitation phases. These could run concurrently. The public safety phase is an assessment of whether the prisoner is likely to re-offend. While he is a danger to public safety, he/she will be detained indefinitely. The rehabilitation phase consists of living in more comfortable surroundings, being educated in order to become employable. A full range of options should be available, and the tuition should be of a high standard. This will be expensive, but if the prisoner then does not re-offend and becomes a useful member of society, it is a price worth paying. If it becomes clear that a prisoner will never satisfy the public safety assessment, although he will be entitled to comforts after the punishment phase, rehabilitation resources will not be squandered on him/her.
Crimes cause the public great expense. Not only the effect of the crime, but also the cost of detecting, the cost of fair trial, and the cost of imprisonment. We should look to recoup some of these costs by confiscating his assets. We are considering charging prisoners for their keep, and if, as is likely, they leave prison with a debt for their stay, then a Citizen's Loan will be made. In other words, they will pay extra taxes when they have a sufficiently high income.
If possible, we have to find ways of detecting more effectively. Some crimes costs millions of pounds in police time alone. But the court process is crazy, hugely inefficient, and needs a thorough review. Prisoners should expect their trial within a month of being charged with a crime. If the lawyers cannot sort out their arguments in that time, then their systems are not working. They must be made to work. This will reduce the number of remand prisoners, and ease pressure on prison capacity.
Legal aid will continue, but will be in the form of a Citizen's Loan. So if someone is deemed to qualify for Legal Aid, and expenses are incurred, these will be met by the Legal Aid Board. Presumably the citizen has qualified for the aid as he/she has a small income. If in the future his/her fortunes change for the better, and he/she secures a good regular income, then earnings above a certain threshold will be taxed an extra percentage.