By most measures our system of trial and punishment must be regarded as substantially failing its chief purpose, encapsulated in the terms "justice" and "correction".
Justice in this country, by which we mean the processes of trial and all matters relating to trial, including non-criminal matters, has now become extraordinarily expensive at every level and outrageously slow to reach conclusions.
Blaming the "system" is all very well, and there has been no shortage of critics over recent decades, and, since dealing to crime and criminals is always a popular electioneering topic, there has been no shortage of populist solutions.
But populist solutions are a fairy story, invariably on this matter reduced to varying degrees of vengeance.
The tendency of recent administrations has been to trail well behind polled public opinion but along the vengeance route; John Key's National Government, however, seems to be making a determined effort to catch up.
Some of these policies have been well-signalled, and some have been due to coalition support party deals.
But in considering them, taxpayers who are also voters need keep in mind the observation by the Minister of Finance that within a few years the Department of Corrections will be our largest department of government; that our prison population rate is the seventh-highest in the OECD; and that the cost of keeping one offender in prison for a year is about $90,000; at the moment we have about 8800 offenders in prisons or police cells, the highest number ever.
In short, if the chief purpose of trial and punishment is to remove offenders from the community, then the cost is very high and will continue to be so, assuming the numbers of the imprisoned keep increasing.
This might be considered a "success" in dealing with criminal activity, but can it be considered a system that works in the sense of reducing crime and rehabilitating offenders?The Minister of Justice, Simon Power, has been a leading advocate of the Government's more severe reforms.
His proposal to have parole applicants pre-screened to "weed out" those considered unlikely to be granted release means an even bleaker prospect of hope for many prisoners, while serving the minister's expectations of sparing victims of crime the "trauma" of regular parole board hearings, and requiring the board to focus on cases requiring more careful consideration.
It might well be that 70% of applications are declined and the prisoners involved expect to be declined, and it might save time and money as well as save some victim distress - worthy objectives indeed, but will it reduce offending? The probability is that it will not.
Mr Power has also initiated further steps anticipated to speed cases through the courts, where it is not unusual for 18 months to pass before a trial begins, frequently with the defendant in custody on remand - a highly unsatisfactory and unjust delay.
But once again, Mr Power described his proposals in terms that appeared to be quite exclusive: delays were "drawing out what is an already painful experience for victims and their families".
In our system of justice, an accused person is considered innocent until proven guilty; they and their families must also surely suffer a "painful experience".
It will be a matter of experience before we know whether the latest ideas, which include raising the threshold before a defendant can be judged by his or her peers, will achieve the goal of faster justice.
One aspect, which may improve access to justice, is the Legal Services Bill, now under study by a select committee, which revises the legal-aid system and establishes an independent statutory officer responsible for deciding grants for legal aid and the management of cases.
All these changes may be considered for the betterment of justice providing they are not simply intended as political sops to public emotion.
Results - or the lack of them - will speak volumes.
If, as is the case, New Zealand's legal system is failing victims and the convicted alike, it is because successive governments have lacked the courage to take other than the easy option; content to respond to what the polls might be indicating, rather than to implement long-term schemes that might actually work to reduce criminality.
Most would agree with Mr Power's assertion that justice belongs to the people; the danger lies in ceding it to the mob.
