Peer-Reviewed Journal on "Statutory Interpretation and Statute Law Research"

Peer-Reviewed Journal 11 pages (3185 words) Sources: 1+

[EXCERPT] . . . .

Statutory Interpretation and Statute Law Research

The study of the law is based on interpretation of the various acts and amendments that have been passed. This is because the process of enforcing the law often involves: law enforcement, attorney's and judges interpreting how a law would be relevant under the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution. To determine how such interpretations can be applied to a variety of situations requires examining how a fictional law (the Importation of Prohibited Chemicals Act of 2010) would apply to two different situations involving Helena and Lucia. You would then conduct in depth research of various statues and laws, to fully understand such distinctions. Together, these two elements would highlight how various statues and case law is interpreted throughout the legal community.

Part I

The Importation of Prohibited Chemicals Act of 2010 has several different implications for the cases of Helena and Lucia. Where, they both highlight how there is inconsistent law enforcement under the provisions of the Act. When looking at the case of Helena, this can be seen with how Commonwealth Chemicals Commission officers stormed into the motel room they were staying. In this particular case, the search was justified based on the legal principal of probable cause. This is where officers believed that a crime is being committed and will act to prevent such actions from taking place. However, the problem with this case is that they are misinterpreting the provisions of the Act. This starts out with what was discovered as a result of the raid and subsequent search of the Helena along with her younger brother Jonathan's room, where an industrial carpet cleaner called Cleano was found. The Act specifically says that the various substances of methalin; hexa-methalin; di-hexamethalin and any other chemical or dangerous substance are prohibited. This is significant because the language is broad enough that you could include virtually any chemical substance that Commonwealth Chemicals Commission officers could determine is dangerous. As a result, the overall aggressiveness and the interpretation of the law are violations of the Commonwealth Constitution, specifically section S109. This applies to the differences between the federal and state / territorial laws. This is because the can of Cleano is a carpet cleaner, which means that it is common enough that it can be sold in the state / territory legally, while the federal law says that the possession of such chemicals is a crime. The obvious inconsistencies between these different laws are what would make the situation in violation of the Constitution.

Then, when you consider the fact that the language is broad enough to include any substances and that the Commonwealth Chemicals Commission officers did not show what specific chemical is in violation of Act, is troubling. One could draw a conclusion that they are overstepping these boundaries, by not providing the defendant with information on what they actions they were in engaged in to be charged with such a violation. This would be an infringement of the basic rights afforded to the accused in all criminal proceedings under the Commonwealth Constitution. The fact that Commonwealth Chemicals Commission officers are not being forthright with all relevant information, means that they over stepped their boundaries.

Evidence of this can be seen with Jonathan (a 14-year-old juvenile offender and brother of Helena) who admitted that the Cleano was his. Helena did not know that he had such a substance in the room with them at the time of the raid. This is significant because it highlights how officers are intentionally overstepping their boundaries by not charging Jonathan with a violation of the law as a juvenile. One could infer that the officers are trying to avoid having to send him to juvenile court, by prosecuting Helena under the law (even though Jonathan admitted that it was his and said Helena knew nothing).

A third way that shows how law enforcement overstepped their boundaries under the law was with the background of the situation. Where, Jonathan and Helena were on holiday staying at a motel room. Commonwealth Chemicals Commission officers go storming into the room, as if they had busted a major ring for the trafficking of illegal substances. While a certain amount of caution when approaching the situation is understandable, the fact that they only recovered one can of Cleano (which may or may not have a banned chemical substance) shows that the suspected activity was not occurring. If it was, then the raid and subsequent search would have turned up large quantities of numerous substances, fire arms, possibly drugs and large amounts of cash. Instead, one can of an industrial carpet cleaner was found. Under the premise of enforcing the law equally, Commonwealth Chemicals Commission officers should arrest and charge all janitorial / cleaning companies that are using this product with a violation of the Act. After all, they would have larger amounts of the substance.

A fourth way that highlights how law enforcement is misinterpreting the law can be seen with the legal precedents established in Maxwell v Murphy and Polyukhovich v Commonwealth of Australia, Where, it states that Parliament should clearly state what their intentions are under the law. In this particular case, Parliament said that they were going after those kinds of chemicals that could be used in a terrorist style attack. This means that it is obvious that neither Helena nor Jonathan is involved in any kind of terrorist activity. The only logical explanation that Commonwealth Chemicals Commission officers can use is: that Jonathan has a criminal record as juvenile. Yet, they do not elaborate as to what his previous conviction was for. Judging from Jonathan's age and Helena being unaware that they had a bottle of carpet cleaner with them, it is clear that the Commonwealth Chemicals Commission officers violated the basic provisions of the law. Where, neither one of them are involved in any kind of terrorist activity, which is the intention of Parliament under the law. Therefore, to prosecute Helena under the Act for retaining a carpet cleaner in a motel room (that she was unaware her brother had and is very common) is a violation of the Commonwealth Constitution.

Under the second case study, involving Lucia, the officers of the Commonwealth Chemicals Commission is not accurately interpreting the law. Where, they catch Lucia, importing large amounts of Methalin and then storing it in her basement. This is troubling because the Act specifically names Methalin as a banned substance. Therefore the possession of it would be a violation of sections 4 and 5 (1) of the Act. What this shows is how officers are obviously ignoring various provision of the law, which talks about how large chemical quantities of such substances are illegal. The fact that she has imported and stored them in her house shows that Lucia continually violated the law.

Then, when you examine the overall true intention of Parliament, this law is designed to prevent dangerous chemicals from falling into the hands of terrorist groups. The fact that they did not arrest Lucia immediately is problematic, because she could be a larger part of a terrorist organization. Where, she is a vital link to a cell that is planning an imminent attack somewhere in Australia. Therefore, the more intelligence and information that can be obtained from her on the scope of her operation as well as contacts, could lead officers to the top leadership within the organization. Instead, Commonwealth Chemicals Commission officers obviously ignored the intention of the law. As a result, this could tell the possible terrorist organization that law enforcement is close behind. At which point, they can change their operations as well as restrict activities to avoid exposing the possible plot and their top leadership because of a breach. Once this takes place, it could mean that Australia is even more susceptible to a terrorist attack, as the misguided actions of law enforcement help to mitigate true effects of the Importation of Prohibited Chemicals Act of 2010.

What the two cases show, is how the interpretation of the Importation of Prohibited Chemicals Act of 2010 by Commonwealth Chemicals Commission officers is incorrect. This is because the person that they are charging in the two cases, more than likely have nothing to do with any kind of terrorist related activity. The fact that they only found one can of a chemical solution (which may or may not have one of the banned substances) is an indication that they are obviously over reaching when it comes to interpreting this aspect of the law. Therefore, one can effectively argue under the Commonwealth Constitution, there is a conflict in state / federal laws and their actions not providing full disclosure to the defendant. This is problematic because the overall intentions of this law were: to prevent dangerous chemical from falling into the hands of terrorist organizations. This is why, if the Commonwealth continues to pursue this case, it would not be surprising to see the charges against Helena dropped, based on Constitutional grounds and the… READ MORE

How to Reference "Statutory Interpretation and Statute Law Research" Peer-Reviewed Journal in a Bibliography

Related Peer-Reviewed Journals:

Wills Outline of Gilbert Law Summaries Essay

Wills

Outline of Gilbert Law Summaries -- Wills

Intestate Succession

Patterns of intestate distribution. Rules vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but generally in those cases where the decedent did not… read more

Essay 10 pages (3832 words) Sources: 0 Topic: Law / Legal / Jurisprudence

---

Count = 3996) Most Important Characteristics Research Paper

Count = 3996)

Most Important Characteristics of the U.S. Legal System

The origins of common law have been administered in English courts since the Middle Ages. Common law is based… read more

Research Paper 13 pages (4005 words) Sources: 5 Topic: Law / Legal / Jurisprudence

---

Wills Can Be Invalidated Essay

However, the law suggests that the aim of statutory minimum benefits is to ensure surviving family members live well, and avoid dependence on a public treasury. This is the same… read more

Essay 7 pages (2104 words) Sources: 0 Topic: Law / Legal / Jurisprudence

---

International Law V Torture in Post-War Iraq Thesis

International Law v Torture in Post-War Iraq and U.S.' Liability

International and U.S. Law Against Torture and Other Ill-treatment

International and U.S. law expressly forbids torture and other forms of… read more

Thesis 25 pages (7379 words) Sources: 6 Topic: Law / Legal / Jurisprudence

---

International Criminal Law Term Paper

International Crime Law

The objective of this work is to Interpret Article 41 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations as it relates to the United States and other countries.… read more

Term Paper 6 pages (1557 words) Sources: 1+ Topic: Law / Legal / Jurisprudence

---

View 100+ more related papers  >>