Awareness on Procedural Fairness: Integral Part of the Social Justice System
Neutral decision-making is one of the primary considerations for judges in order to make effective and universally accredited adjudication. On the other hand, application of the aspects of humanity in a case can be considered as another major consideration for a case. In cases of Andrea Rogers and Jose Barrientos, Frank Caprio maintained proper ground of humanity by showing respect to appellant. Moreover, in both of the cases Judge Frank Caprio showed the skillfulness. In both of the cases Judge showed dignity to the aspects of humanity and had made decision on the ground of humanity. From these aspects, it can be stated that judge made adjudication by maintaining fairness.
Procedural fairness in a rational sense is observed to be a specific name in the aspect of broadest view of systematic natural justice. In this context, Australian constitutional law has a preview of procedural fairness intrigued with some major elements namely neutrality, voice, respectful treatment along with engendering trust amongst public authorities. Rationally, it can be stated that administrative decisions being outlined in many cases are observed to be intrigued with breaching of rules of the natural justice system that occurred due to inefficient decision-making system. In this relation, following report is eliciting needs of judges’ awareness with respect different perceptions of procedural fairness within the social justice system of Australia.
The Municipal Court judges that namely Frank Caprio is been able to win hearts of billions of people due to his controlled engagement into the problems of individual. This judge can be especially recognized for his empathy to defendants. The distressed people are virtually served with positive responses from this judge that has eventually helped the poor souls to get relief from their individual problems (cbsnews.com, 2017). Apart from that, Caprio J has observed to be consistently treating the involved participants with equal viewpoint, which is further allowing this judge to display behavior appropriateness with respect to individual situations. Careful listening as well as impartial treatment to individuals is arguing in favor of his judgment (ballawyers.com.au, 2017). This attitude is further helping this judge to be appropriate with relevance to procedural fairness within the social justice system of Australia.
Judge Frank Caprio, as evident, is extremely sympathetic for the defendants in particular cases. Caprio J has an apprehension about people’s obligation about Australian federal government, which is further responsible for this overwhelming empathic attitude. According to this apprehension, people have lowering faith on social justice system being employed by the government and thus, are accustomed more with institutions that are coming down heavily regardless of personal circumstances (Rottman, D., & Tyler, 2014). The evidence of his compassionate behavior towards distressed people can be evidenced from working out payment plans for the struggling people. Tenderhearted approach of Frank Caprio is preserved with transparent and clear application Australian laws that, in turn, are helping for decision-making process.
An instance can be provided as where woman whose was disturbed with stabbing death of her son was fined $400 for not having parking tickets. The kind-hearted judge dismissed the case after dismissing the tickets (law.com, 2017). In this sense, it can be stated without ambiguity that Frank Caprio is much neutral as well as consistent and principled with respect to social justice system of Australia. This, in turn, is helping him to be obliged with constitutional legal legislations such as Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) of this country that is further purposive for holding the ground of procedural fairness of the social justice system (fedcourt.gov.au, 2015).
According to the case study it can be stated that decision of Frank Caprio was based on the ground of basic humanity which are mentioned Article 10 of Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Legislation, 2018). From the mentioned regulation of this article it can be stated that all people arrived in the court needs to be treated on the ground on basic humanity. Especially for the case Jose Barrientos, Frank Caprio as judge of federal court showed proper respect to the plaintiff in this case of the Jose Barrientos. The ground of health needs to be considered in case of making any kind of adjudication according to Health Practitioner Regulation National Law Act 2009 (Ahpra, 2018). Hence, consideration of this regulation in this ground was suitable and exact.
On the other hand, Frank Caprio allowed Andrea Rogers to show her ground properly and this can be considered another example of showing respect to the appellant. Moreover, in both of the cases, the appellant was victimized by parking tickets and in these cases; the decision of Judges was on the ground of humanity (cbsnews.com, 2017). Frank Caprio had dismissed parking tickets in both cases by showing respect to emotional factors of appellant related to these cases.
Voice with respect to legal proceedings is found to have an immense impact on the decision-making system being deployed by a country or community. In this sense, the following case example can be positively integrated with this specific requirement of respondent and defendant’s voice acknowledgement by the judges (Tyler & Jackson, 2014). This judge Frank Caprio for allowing participants with raised argumentative voice is showing extreme skillfulness. An instance can be provided where Judy Baros, a disabled woman had been ticketed for parking her vehicle in the no-parking zone (cbsnews.com, 2017). However, when she approached to Caprio J, she had a feeling that the judge listened properly to the problem of victim. Immediately the judge dismissed the ticket because Baros was holding a disability placard.
Another kind-hearted approach followed by voice acknowledgement of the defendant can be seen in the case of Andrea Rogers, a sufferer from stabbing death of her son. She had given sufficient scopes for explaining her struggles inside the courtroom who had also been accused with parking penalties. Judge Caprio listened attentively her struggling with life and immediately dismissed the penalties after consoling her properly (ballawyers.com.au, 2017). This is further exemplifying that how judges has to be skillful in demonstrating arguments, witness and documents before legal prosecution system that would be further suitable for attending comprehension of participants with respect to legal proceedings.
Procedural fairness has to be equipped with a positive legal outcome with which trustworthiness of the judgmental process is integral. In this sense, it can be rationalized from the case examples involved with Judy Baros or Andrea Rogers that the victims with any kind of difficulties can approach Judge Frank Caprio indefinitely. The case examples are providing a fact that defendants have gained positive responses from this judge. The victims are being able to draw the kind attention of the judge and sympathetic behavior of the judge has entertained this purpose of the victims. In these cases, Caprio J had shown sufficient judicial fairness, which is further favoring impartiality being shown to all parties approached to this judge.
Personal prejudices had set apart by this judge at the time of hearing sufferings of victims. This has helped for maintaining a neutral demeanor in court, which is proved favorable for applying rules comprehensively over cases and across people. From these instances, it can be stated that people can approach Caprio with much confidence since he has treated everyone with dignity, respect and courtesy. Frank Caprio is forwarding appropriate consideration in each case example for endeavoring rights of individuals.
From the above study, it can be concluded that procedural fairness is integral part of the social justice system. Indeed, some definite aspects have to be considered by the judges for having a legitimate outcome on the output of social justice system. These aspects are acknowledgement of respect, voice and neutrality for individual sufferers or victims. Rationally speaking, maintaining and focusing on these individual aspects can raise the level of consideration amongst people regarding acceptance of a judge or a judgment. This fact can be virtually proved by exemplifying case examples being handled by Frank Caprio, a judge of Australian Municipal Court.