New Day Rising
Veteran Member
Sorry, but you're still just not getting it. You need to understand how the law works in a democratic system with separation of powers.
Now, bearing in mind that actual laws and the names of offences vary between (and within) or countries, but a lot of basic principles apply across each:
Let's say I beat someone up. The police could charge me with common assault, but they charge me with serious assault instead, which carries a tougher penalty. Same as 'assault occasioning actual bodily harm' versus 'assault occasioning grievous bodily harm'. Or misdemeanour assault versus felony assault. All the latter carry tougher penalties than the former.
Have the police created new laws? No. Are they using the discretion that is a fundamental element of police practice to decide what part of the existing law to charge me under? Yes. Do the police decide I get the tougher penalty? No - the court decides that as the court is the arbiter of the law. If the facts of the case do not support the more serious charge, the prosecution will fail.
Or the police announce that they will treat the killing of security personnel as First Degree Murder, rather than Second Degree Murder. Or as Murder instead of Manslaughter. Same as above.
Of course, the government can decide it will change the law so that from now on killing security personnel will automatically be treated as the more serious offence. Governments can do that as they make the laws. Police can only enforce them, with a degree of discretion; police cannot make laws.
Let me know if you need that clarified any further.
