Criminal Law: Evaluating OAPA's Relevance in Modern Society Essay

This essay delves into the realm of Criminal Law, focusing on the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 (OAPA) and its relevance in modern society. It critically evaluates the Act's suitability, highlighting its historical context, archaic language, and flawed hierarchy of offenses. The essay examines specific non-fatal offenses such as assault and battery, as well as more serious offenses under sections 18 and 20 of the OAPA, providing case examples to illustrate key points. It critiques the Act's complexities, outdated terminology, and the need for reform. The essay also considers previous reform attempts and concludes that the OAPA remains unsatisfactory and requires replacement with updated legislation that addresses its shortcomings and offers greater clarity for the modern era. The essay emphasizes the need for a more rational structure and plain language to ensure the law is accessible and effective in the 21st century.

CRIMINAL LAW

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
ESSAY ............................................................................................................................................1
CONCLUSION ...............................................................................................................................5
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................6

INTRODUCTION
Criminal Law refers to body of the law related to crime. It prescribes the behaviour
supposed as harmful, aggressive or then risking to health, safety, property and social well being
of the people comprehensive of the self. There are various criminal laws are formed by the act, it
state that law are passed by the legislature. The unlawful involves rehabilitation and penalty of
the people who violates the laws. It varies on basis of authority and is different from the criminal
laws. The emphasis is over dispute resolution and compensation of victims rather than
rehabilitation or punishment. The purpose of this essay is to evaluate laws in regard to the non
fatal offences against person is no longer fit for the purpose and is in need for reform. The essay
will focus over Offences Against the person Act, 1861 and it's suitability of the crime of modern
society.
ESSAY
Offences against Person Act, 1861 are widely criticised for need for reformation for
being outdated. Issue provided is related with identifying whether current law over non fatal is
effective or requires update. OAPA is regarded as bag of the offences that are brought from
number of sources. Although there is shared perception, some may argue with statement where
they observe present act as suitable.
This act is act of UK Parliament and combined the requirements related to the crimes
against individual from number of previous laws to single act. Majority of the requirement were
as per draftsman of Act, combined with no or little difference in phrasing. In the act there is one
group that is called as Criminal Laws Consolidation Act, 1861(Gaffney-Rhys, 2017). The act
was approved with purpose of simplifying laws. Essentially it is reviewed form of previous
Consolidation Act, Offences Against Person Act, 1828 including the following acts.
Act is in force from 150 years, which is amended frequently. Despite of long criticised
history of various features of Act and the frequent efforts at the reform, which remains heavily in
use. Offences in 1861 Act, form basis for 26000 trials each year. The act is mainly alliance of the
earlier statutes that governs laws of crimes. The continuous modification in laws have left it in
the confusing state, with provisions revoked presently in force.
Non fatal offences is attack which is common law crime and could be any act that
grounds individual for apprehending instant illegal crime. Assault is committed if the person
perform acts through which they recklessly or intentionally cause another person for
1

apprehending criminal violence (Benedet, 2018). It is least serious disease as no direct contact is
there between victim and offender. Here, an example of assault is demonstrated in the DPP vs
Smith. In this case defendant pointed fake gun at victim in which it caught crime. Assault
committed as victim arrested the instant illegal violence as offender acted carelessly. Unlike
assault, the actual contact is required between victim and defendant for the offence to occur. The
crime is recognised as unlawful touching.
Moving to serious offences of sect 20 of OAPA is nasty hurting or serious body harm.
The segment state that whoever is nasty hurting or serious body harm over another individual
with or without weapons or instrument should be guilty of offence. For instance- R v Saunders
where defendant has been charged for malicious or unlawful wounding contrary to the OAPA
1861, sect 20. Defendant threw glass of a beer over former girlfriend of the husband. Glass broke
and victim was severely hurt from it (Offences Against Person Act, 2020). Defendant contended
intention was not to throw glass but beer only. Charge was made under sect 20 was made.
Most serious offence so far discussed is causing or hurting or serious body harm with the intent
under sect 18. Defendants wound or the cases where there is psychiatric harm and physical harm.
Arhaic language and the terminology
Undesirable aspect of 1861 Act which is drafted in the arhaic language that should have
no place for violence trial in 21st century. Conditions like detainer and the obsolete terminology
could be unclear even to the experts and it may definitely damage availability of laws to lay
people (Goldbeck-Wood, 2017). Usage of the obsolete and wrongly practical language is highly
necessary when the rise in number of the offenders have been self represented.
Term bodily fashioned is old fashioned as per Law Commission Report. Case laws are
developed in this to support the argument as in case of Ireland vs Burstow where Lord Steyn
argued that Victorian official is not having in mind a psychiatric sickness. It provides that
regulation proposes that law do not show the psychological well being problems formed within
people as Victorian approach is not essential. Further the obsolete legislations use language
which are inapplicable in modern times.
Flawed hierarchy
OAPA is having unclear and distorted hierarchy as presented by Eugencios in regard with
crimes under sect 20 and 47. Offences have same mens rea and maximum penalty for 5 years.
The hierarchy is not based over unified logical criterion (McGlynn and Bows, 2019). They are
2

not built specifically on the seriousness as it is evaluated by existing verdict by injury caused or
through criminal mental state but it shows difficult negotiation among three.
Unnecessary degree of complexity and specificity
Here, the act is created in such a manner that crimes are particular overly in account and
also unnecessary complex. For example there are distinct crimes that criminalise similar damage
which will be built over various means through which similar is caused. The instances contains
particular crimes producing body injury by use of explosives or by poison. The offences were
covered more by general injury offences that involves injury of that level (sec 18 or 20).
Very frequent used sect 18 offences could be committed by occasioning grievous
wounding or bodily harm, while intending to make bodily harm or preventing detention or
apprehension. It creates 10 methods of committing offence from which some are considered as
distinct offences that needs to be charged separately on indictment (Carnegie and Roth, 2019).
Section 29 is highly critical causing, cover explosives, transfer explosives or the other toxic
things to do bodily harm. There are around 50 methods to commit offences contained in single
sentence of 1861 Act.
The complexities are product of drafting style which was characteristic of Victorian era.
In fact, 1861 is consolidation of variety of crimes created in earlier times with few change by
draftsman effecting consolidation. It is highly change from way it is expected from modern
criminal statutes to describe offences.
Unnecessary offences
Separate and similar issues is that Act consists the crimes which are redundant like
attacking clergy man in discharge of obligations. General crimes of battery and assault and the
public order offence provides security in the cases which may be sued under the crime. Examples
of the redundant provisions are offence of obstruct an individual who is escaping shiwreck and
attacking judge in exercise of the duty for preserving accident. Neither of the crimes are needed
in present times, which is verified by completed evidence of the use and in majority of cases,
facts would be enclosed by the other crimes like wrong custody or an attempted killing for first
crime and battery or assault for second. It has been seen that 11th Programme of the Law Reform
(1861 Act ) follows Victorian Approach for recording the distinct crimes for each real scenario,
most of them not necessary.
Previous attempts for Law reform
3

With numerous acknowledge problems 1861 Act, remains on statute books even after
number of previous attempts for the reform. As explained in SCP from 1980 there are 6 law
improvement forms in the part of law issued by different governments, starting with 14th report
of Criminal Law Revision Committee on Offences Against Person in the 1980 and the ending in
consultation paper and a draft bill of Home Office in 1998. Thus, every efforts had received solid
academic and practitioner support at that time (Cross, 2017). Consultation paper of Law
Commission in 1992 got effective support which report followed in same year, which was
supplemented by the draft Bill. The participants ranging from the police groups to different
judiciary level and major practitioner group reinforced call for urgent required improvement of
the crimes in contrast to individual.
Structure of the core injury offences
The important crimes of the violence included in present laws are organised in the rough
structure of the seriousness, but it is flawed in number of ways. Basic structure to increase the
seriousness are; at lowest level are battery and assault that exists outside 1861 Act. In common
law these are 2 different crimes. The battery is act of the individual unlawful crime. Every crime
carries 6 months of custody and triable only in magistrate court. Next crime is assault causing
actual body injury with extreme fine for 5 years of prison (Rethinking of Non Fatal Offences
against Person, 2020). This offence should not required any proof which accused foresaw or
intended harm caused. Crime is only triable in Crown Court or in Magistrate Court.
Next offence is malicious inflicting or wounding of the serious body injury. This is
treated by all as serious crime than the assault causing body injury, carrying penalty for 5 years
of imprisonment. Most significant crime in non fatal offence is purposely causing a serious body
injury, that can cause lifetime custody that is penalty.
Need for Reform
Despite of evident issues which are demonstrated with current laws over non fatal
offences. There are marginal organisations who argue with idea of improvement of Act.
Organisations like Bar Council and Criminal Bar views the faults only as hypothetical and the
lawful significance is established by the case laws.
The act remains disorganised because of unclear structure. For example, no statutory
definition has been given for battery or assault due to which there is absence of classification. In
case of the Lynsey [1995] turns the confusion between battery and assault. It was observed by
4

Lord Henry that present appeal does not have real significance but is example of how bad law
costs money and also clogs up courts with effective things for doing.
The possible answer to above describe problems will be improved act. Consultation paper
has been printed by Home Office known as 'Violence: Reforming Offences against Person Act
1861 which included Draft Bill 1998. The Bill represents crimes set in rational structure and
plain English. All law reforms proposal from Criminal Law Revision Committee Report in year
1980 to draft bill of Home Office (Goldbeck-Wood, 2017). It suggests hierarchy of the offences.
It intentionally causes harm, carelessly causing a severe harm, recklessly or intentionally causing
the harm. Single offence substitutes the battery and assault. Even though clarity, bill provides
that there was a disapproval that led in lack of progress in overview.
It is considered that non fatal offences are central to criminal justice system and there is
increased need for proposed reform for higher clarity and efficiency. Legislation has been
governing from around 150 years which makes it essential to update the existing laws as per
present era that are related to Victorian era. Number of offenders were time restricted, that only a
judicial interpretation is available for tackling the outdated legislations. Though number of
attempts have been made there is always comparative silence over the concern from Ministry of
the Justice.
CONCLUSION
It could be concluded that OAPA remains to be unsatisfactory on the grounds that it is
not clear, has old language and basically faulty with support to Law Commission statement.
OAPA requires necessary improvement and needs to be replaced with newer legislations that
addresses above mentioned defects in Act. It is required to have more clarity in the act. In the
modern era there are number of ways through which crime could be committed therefore it is
essential that clear sections and definition are provided by laws to lawyers and people both.
5

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Benedet, J., 2018. Sentencing for Sexual Offences against Children and Youth: Mandatory
Minimums, Proportionality and Unintended Consequences. Queen's LJ. 44. p.284.
Carnegie, A. and Roth, R., 2019. From the Grassroots to the Oireachtas: Abortion Law Reform
in the Republic of Ireland. Health and human rights.21(2). p.109.
Cross, C., 2017. Submission to the Victorian Law Reform Commission on the Review of the
Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996.
Gaffney-Rhys, R., 2017. From the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 to the Serious Crime
Act 2015-the development of the law relating to female genital mutilation in England and
Wales. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law. 39(4). pp.417-434.
Goldbeck-Wood, S., 2017. Reforming abortion services in the UK: less hypocrisy, more
acknowledgment of complexity.
McGlynn, C. and Bows, H., 2019. Possessing extreme pornography: Policing, prosecutions and
the need for reform. The Journal of Criminal Law. 83(6). pp.473-488.
Online
Rethinkoing of Non Fatal Offences against Person. 2020. [Online] Available trough:
<https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/qmlj8&div=9&id=&pag
e=>
Offences Against Person Act. 2020. [Online] Available trough:
<http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/app/uploads/2015/11/51950-LC-HC555_Web.pdf>
6