THE RELEASE OF PRISONERS

Dominion, Volume 20, Issue 47, 19 November 1926, Page 12

THE RELEASE OF PRISONERS

BY PRISONS BOARD IS LEGISLATION SOUND? A FULL REVIEW URGED Still urging that the Government owes it to the people of New Zealand to grant an independent inquiry into the reasons lor recent releases by the Prisons Board, the Rev. Howard Elliott, in an interview yesterday. described a statutory method by which he claimed a full review of the existing legislation on the subject could be made with the object of improving it and bringing about a more effective operation.

"The tacts which have been brought to light concerning the administration of justice,” remarked Mr. Elliott, "indicate that the intentions of the framers of the legislation to render our penal system more' humane and in keeping with modern sentiment and thought are being frustrated, and that the high purposes of the legislation introduced during the term of Sir John Findlay, K.C., as Minister of Justice, and passed into law are being reduced to a fiasco. The intention of the Legislature was not, 1 think, to make it possible for delinquents to escape with a mere nominal infliction of punishment, especially when, in the view of the presiding Judge, the crime deserved punishment? The operations of the Prisons Board have been so secret that the public know nothing whatever of the reasons for releases and, if possible, even less about the reasons for refusing to release. During the last few weeks I have had a large number of cases instanced to me of men who have had to serve the full terra of their sentences, and I am quite unable to discern anv facts differentiating their cases from' that of Baume. If the Prisons Board can release one man and hold another there may be, as in the cases now being publicly discussed, strong reasons for dissenting from their decision, but there is no appeal. Is it not open to supposition that there may be good and adequate grounds for reviewing the decisions of the Prisons Board ? "With the advance of thought in regard to punishments for crime, probably the greatest advance of _ recent years lias been made in the direction of affirming the necessity for more rigorous penal, and possibly surgical treatment for offenders convicted of sexual offences. The Prisons Board apparently does not share that view, else why the release of Mackay and Baker? A Suggested Remedy. "The Legislature has provided in the Commissions of Inquiries Act that any part of the legislation on our Statute Book may be subject to review with a view of improving the same or to making it more effective. I have, I think, evidence enough in hand-, to prove in an open inquiry of a suitable character that the Crimes Act and the Prisons Act are capable of considerable amendment to the benefit of the whole community, and not less to those who unfortunately are the inmates of our penal establishments. Further, the cases which are now being discussed involve the decisions of at least two Judges and the contrary decision of another Judge, ft cannot be alleged with any show of reason that the decisions of judges are unassailable, otherwise the Full Court and the Appeal Court would not exist; and it is not an unknown or even an unusual thing for the decision of a Judge to be upset on appeal. Why, then, should the Minister of Justice set up the plea that a Judge, however able and respected, when sitting upon the Prisons Board, should give decisions incapable of being assailed or reviewed ? Is it not due to the electors that the Government should avail itself of the provisions of the legislation to re-establish the confidence of the public in the administration of justice? Would it not be more satisfactory to the partiese concerned if a commission under the Commissions of Inquiries Act, consisting of two Judges, were set up and the whole question of the operation of the Prisons, Crimes, and Borstal Institutions Acts reviewed, not onlv so far as thev affect the present cases, but as a whole? There can be no doubt but that Magistrates and Judges, as well as members of the general public, have from time to time expressed dissatisfaction, concern, and uneasiness regarding the operation and administration of the Prisons Board.” “OUR FULL APPROVAL” MR. ELLIOTT SUPPORTED BY P.P'.A. EXECUTIVE. At a meeting of the Dominion Executive of the Protestant Political Association yesterday, the following resolutions were carried unanimously:— “That Mr. Howard Elliott, as Do-

minion Secretary, in preferring charges against the administration of justice in connection with the Baume, Mackay, an dßaker cases, lias acted with the full knowledge and approval of this executive; that the demand made by him for a Royal Commission to investigate the whole ol the charges is unanimously endorsed as being in the interest'of the impartial administration of the law.” “That the Dominion Executive affirms the statement made that the Prime Minister stated to a deputation of the Dominion Executive of the Protestant Political Association, in February last, that Mr Dallard’s temporary appointment as Controller-General of Prisons was merelv for the purpose of investigating the accounts and would not be made permanent. Therefore, this executive strongly protests against the appointment being made permanent, and will regard anv confirmation of the appointment as a breach of faith on the'part of the Government.”