Page 831 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 13 March 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
That is something that is often overlooked. Prosecuting authorities have a discretion in determining what charge will be laid. It is common - as Mr Stefaniak, as a former prosecutor, would be well aware - for a series of charges to be laid against an individual but, on the day the matters proceed, perhaps for some of them to be dropped and one matter only to proceed.
That does not cause any eyebrows to be raised by anyone who has familiarity with the court processes, but to the individual that can be quite distressing. The victim can wonder why the charges apparently have been dropped or a lesser offence has been proceeded with. It would be an important improvement to the administration of justice in this Territory if the authorities bore in mind the need to always carefully explain to the victim why that has been done. Again, I am sure that happens in practice quite often in the Territory, but it is not a clear goal. The administration of justice would be improved if that occurred.
In point 4 is the requirement to have a comprehensive statement taken at the time of the initial investigation which sets out what happened and to have that tendered before the accused is sentenced. This is the so-called victim impact statement. There has been some controversy about victim impact statements and some parliamentary committees in New South Wales and Victoria have taken somewhat differing views on the advantages of a victim impact statement. I note, however, that the National Committee on Violence basically thought this was a worthwhile idea. I also note from discussions with people in South Australia that it has, in practice, proved to be non-controversial and, in practice, is being seen to be advantageous.
The concern, I think, about a victim impact statement is that it may be seen to be a sort of demand for retribution by an enraged victim and that that could be seen to be tilting the scales of the process of justice. But in practice it is presented in a very impartial and very calm manner and it allows the sentencing officer, the judicial officer, to have some understanding of how the crime has affected the victim, and that is important in weighing up the question of sentencing.
I will not go through all of the 17 points point by point, but the thrust of this declaration is to provide information to the victim and to make sure that the victim feels as though they are involved as a key part of the prosecution and law enforcement process. This declaration was adopted in South Australia. It has formed the basis of the South Australian crime prevention strategy, which seems to be working well and achieving community support and an effective basis for a community policing program.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .