Page 1539 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 2 May 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
All we have seen are the media releases with no issue papers nor detailed proposals from the Attorney-General in support of the concept.
Mr Phelps also said that it was understood a consultant had been engaged to undertake a review of the court system and to report by 30 June. The consultant about whom we are talking will be referred to later. The interesting thing about the consultant is that he was engaged to undertake a review of the court system and to report by 30 June. So a review is to be conducted by Lindsay Curtis, formerly Deputy Secretary of the Commonwealth Attorney-General's Department. He is to report by 30 June, which is too late because the handover is due to happen a day later.
Who else gets a say? I see Mr Collaery is going to enjoy correcting us and explaining to the community just what is going on. It is very difficult to work out, both with the courts and with the policing, what is going on because it is so difficult to get any information on it. It would appear that in such a short time there will be so little consultation with lawyers and judges, but I must point out that the lawyers and judges are not the only ones with a vital interest in this issue.
Many other community members are also interested in the court system. It may surprise you, Mr Collaery, but people in the ACT, even though they are not legal professionals, are interested in what happens to our court system and in being able to have a say in what happens. Justice Miles, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, obviously feels very strongly about the issue to take the very unusual step of making public remarks on a basically political issue twice in three days. He has said:
There may well be a strong case for abolishing the ACT Magistrates Court and reconstituting it as a court with an enlarged jurisdiction.
According to his speech that Mr Collaery tabled yesterday, he is not opposed to reform of the court system. He makes that quite clear. In my interpretation, he is opposed to the narrow parameters that it seems Mr Collaery has given in its reform. He said:
... the fundamental constitutional position of the superior court of first instance within the system must be recognised and preserved. To confer a residual jurisdiction on another court is ... to cut across the constitutional principle, a step which has not been taken elsewhere in Australia.
It is not critical that something has not been taken elsewhere in Australia but, if that is to be the case, very broad-ranging community consultation is necessary. Radical restructuring of the ACT court system must be carefully considered. The attraction of more efficient administration
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .