Is the current law on Conspiracy to commit Murder effective and fair?

Chloe Collins, Chelsie Rapley, Brian Chia, Luke Smith, Ben Middlemass

Abstract


“Conspirators be they that…bind themselves by Oath…or other Alliance, that every of them shall aid and support the Enterprise of each other falsely and maliciously to indite.”

Established in the Third Ordinance of Conspirators in 1304; the first definition of conspiracy was to prevent and punish those who would plan to use children to present their false accusations in court on their behalf (as children could not be criminally liable). The aim of the law on conspiracy, although widening the scope, has been clear from the thirteenth century: to prevent and punish the planning of a criminal offence. However, since expanding, the law on conspiracy has been criticised especially in regard to sentencing as “unduly harsh.” This is the result of numerous problems with the current law on conspiracy to murder, which is in urgent need of reform. “On the 10th of October 2007, the law commission proposed many recommendations on reforms of statutory conspiracy” (Law Commission 2018). The focus of this legal research is to explore the current state of law regarding conspiracy to murder and the legislation, case law, scholarly and media articles discussed in this report will evaluate the effectiveness and fairness of the law on conspiracy to murder. Thus, the question to sum up our legal research “Is the current law on conspiracy to commit murder effective and fair?"


Full Text:

PDF XML


DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.19164/sjppar.v1i1.801

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2019 Chloe Collins, Chelsie Rapley, Brian Chia, Luke Smith, Ben Middlemass

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.