Page 2892 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 11 October 2022

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video


thought and work, through the statutory review and then further work to develop amendments when we extended the act for one year only most recently.

These powers do remain invasive, but I am pleased that we have been able to make progress on improving the human rights safeguards, to be nation leading. Of course, this must all be considered with the backdrop that, if our laws vacated this space, the substantially more restrictive commonwealth laws would remain in force as the only option in the ACT.

Recognising that the powers in the act are extraordinary, the bill includes a further statutory review to be undertaken into the act’s operation and effectiveness closer to the new sunset date for the act. This is an important safeguard, noting that the act has been reviewed three times previously.

The ACT act can be distinguished from equivalent legislation in other jurisdictions based on the significant safeguards that are included. Due to the nature of the powers contained in the act, it is important to ensure that the fundamental legal principles of justice in human rights are preserved and protected. However, we must always be looking for opportunities to improve these human rights protections to ensure that ACT legislation continues to adhere to human rights standards.

The bill proposes a number of additional amendments to improve the human rights protections in the act to ensure that the ACT can continue to meet its obligations of protecting the human rights of all people in the territory.

I would like to note to the Assembly that I am proposing to move a number of government amendments to the bill, as Mr Cain has alluded to, which seek to further strengthen the proposed safeguards. These government amendments are being made in response to comments made by the Standing Committee on Justice and Community Safety in its legislative scrutiny role. I thank the committee for its insightful comments, which have assisted in making sure that the amendments in the bill achieve their purpose and intent in strengthening the human rights protections afforded in the act.

I would like to discuss the government amendments briefly, for the benefit of the Assembly. The bill proposed an amendment which would allow for the taking of identification material—namely, photographs or video recordings—to record an injury or illness that a detained person may suffer. The intent of this amendment was to ensure the welfare of a detained person and to also increase police accountability for any injury or illness that may be suffered in their custody. The scrutiny committee commented that the drafting of the original amendment appeared permissive, so there would be no obligation to take identification material in every situation where a detained person suffered an injury or illness.

As this was not the intent of this amendment, I am proposing a government amendment which would make it mandatory for police officers to make a written record of any injury or illness. Where evidence can be recorded visually, it will be mandatory for officers to take or cause to be taken a photograph or video recording of the injury or illness.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video