HSC Stuff > HSC Legal Studies
HSC Legal Studies Question Thread
jamonwindeyer:
--- Quote from: chuckiecheese on March 05, 2016, 08:17:48 pm ---How do I go about responding to the human rights short answer question? For example, "How are is ONE human right best protected in Australia..."
Cheers
--- End quote ---
Hey chuckiecheese! Awesome question, and quite a broad one, I'll answer it the best way I can and feel free to follow up with me if it's confusing ;D
So, your Trial and HSC Exam (and any others will be similar) will have 15 marks of Human Rights Short Answer Questions. So, you won't get just one, you will get a variety of questions.
The questions worth lower marks are a little easier, because the questions are quite narrow. For example: Identify two non-governmental organisations that assist with the promotion of human rights. They have a very specific focus and thus are a little easier to answer, since you are directed.
The more difficult questions (and the ones you are probably more concerned about) are the more open ended questions. For example, your question, How is ONE human right best protected in Australia. These are tricky because you aren't given a direct path to go down, you more or less form your own ideas. And this is tough.
My advice for these sorts of question is to respond with a PEEL/MATES paragraph, just like you would use in the body of your essay.
Start with a topic sentence, addressing the question and giving your judgement (if it is necessary, and often, it is nice to blend one in anyway). In the case of your question, you'll obviously identify which area you are addressing. Follow it up with an amplification statement giving a little more info.
Human rights, such as the right to freedom of movement, although enshrined in international law, are most effectively handled by domestic jurisdictions. Indeed, in Australia, the right to freedom of movement is most effectively protected by domestic legislation and judicial decisions.
Follow this up with your actual response to the question, supported by examples. How is the human right protected in Australia? Be sure to include laws and cases at bare minimum, and even media/reports if you can. You could write sentences like:
The Criminal Code (Trafficking in Persons Offences) Amendment Act 2005 (Cth), enables offences which infringe on this fundamental right to be prosecuted at the federal level. Such has occurred in cases such as R v Ho et al (2012), where state superior courts have successfully applied domestic legislation to handle people trafficking offences.
Once you have exhausted your evidence (or run out of room), simply conclude with something like:
Thus, it is clear that domestic legislation, judicial decisions, and other legal mechanisms prove vital to the protection of human rights such as the right to freedom of movement.
This PEEL approach is systematic, and guarantees a well structured response. Just be careful to address the question, and also to address the specific verb. I always throw in a little evaluation, but be sure that if you need to evaluate, you evaluate. If you only need to describe, just describe. Make the separation between high order response (analyse, synthesise, evaluate, explain) and low order response (identify, list, describe). It will save you lots of time :D
16ebond:
Hey
So I was just wondering how I would write an essay on this question?
Evaluate the effectiveness of the criminal justice system in dealing with young offenders in respect the two issues.
Thanks so much
Em :)
elysepopplewell:
--- Quote from: 16ebond on March 07, 2016, 06:55:01 pm ---Hey
So I was just wondering how I would write an essay on this question?
Evaluate the effectiveness of the criminal justice system in dealing with young offenders in respect the two issues.
Thanks so much
Em :)
--- End quote ---
Hey Em!
There are sooo many ways that you can answer this. I would take a scaffold like this and work with it:
Introduction:
-Sentence addressing the question. INCLUDING your evaluation.
-Sentence describing a brief history of Y.O and the importance of the CJS responding to them.
-The main legislation that you will be referring to.
-The main issues that you will discuss.
Body paragraphs should be broken up into the issues to be discussed.
Try these issues: The age of Criminal Responsibility, the diversionary programs available, the rights of young children when questioned or detained or the Children's Court.
The paragraph structure might be like this:
-Introduction of the issue being discussed and statement on the effectiveness.
-Describe the features of the issue.
-Provide evidence for or against.
-Use cases, definitely mention legislation. (Cases for Y.O. are hard to come across, so don't hold back from using statistics in their place)
-Continually evaluate the effectiveness.
If you are referring to the Age of Criminal Responsibility, look into where Australia stands against other countries and what the UN suggests.
Because there are few cases available for your discussion, make sure you load your response with media and statistics :)
Henandez:
‘Juries should not be given the responsibility of deciding complicated criminal cases. That's the essay question and we are to write 600 to 1000 words about our viewpoint and stand, and I am really not sure where to start could you please help!...(Jean-Pierre)
jamonwindeyer:
--- Quote from: Henandez on March 10, 2016, 10:05:30 pm ---‘Juries should not be given the responsibility of deciding complicated criminal cases. That's the essay question and we are to write 600 to 1000 words about our viewpoint and stand, and I am really not sure where to start could you please help!...(Jean-Pierre)
--- End quote ---
Hey Hernandez! A loaded question there, and quite common at the moment, quite a few students have this question popping up.
So, in English, this question is asking you to evaluate the effectiveness of juries in the criminal trial system. Are they good, are they bad, are they ugly, and why you think this is the case. Specifically, it is alluding to the fact that, although juries are given the responsibility of determining the verdict in a criminal trial, they possess little to no actual legal knowledge. This has been a source for contention for ages, and the argument is basically:
Juries represent contemporary communal values and so will assist in achieving just outcomes for modern societies.
versus
The lack of legal knowledge possessed by jurors may lead to wrongful convictions/acquittals and thus prevent the passage of justice.
You need to decide where you stand on this before doing anything else. Some reading can help.
To start, try doing a bit of research. Read into the 'Juries' part of your textbook, google some legislation, keep an eye peeled for media articles and cases to back up your argument. Then, based on your research, you need to form what is called a Thesis. I have a whole bunch of tips on this!
That would be the best way to start. Come up with a cool Thesis argument (hopefully some of my tips in that linked post can help you), and research laws, cases, reports, media articles, anything you can to back it up ;D
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version