Page 2869 - Week 10 - Thursday, 15 August 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
whole to obey them. I think that particularly relates to these circumstances where people obviously need to be coming to courts with a strong impression in their minds that appearing in a court is a matter of the gravest importance, and that telling the truth to those courts is a matter which cannot be taken for granted.
That goes back to the question of how children give evidence in court. Obviously children, like anybody else who comes before a court, have to be impressed strongly with the understanding that in appearing before a court they are not necessarily under oath but they are certainly under an obligation to tell the truth. That cannot be allowed to pass to one side or be put to the back of anybody's mind in the process of getting children to talk about particular incidents before a court. It is essential that even the youngest children understand that their obligation is to tell the truth, to tell what happened exactly and precisely, and not to embellish that truth.
I believe, Mr Speaker, that the balance preserved in the legislation is an appropriate one in that regard. It is important in that respect, for example, that not only is a court able to hear and to see what a child is saying in another room - let us say that it is an anteroom to the court where that child is giving evidence for the court - but also the child in the anteroom is able at least to hear what is happening in the court, the questions and the comments of counsel or of the judge in the court.
The idea that one puts the child at some distance from, say, a parent or a member of the family who might be the accused in this case, or close to the accused, is important; but it is important also to preserve some closeness between that child and the officers of the court who are conducting, in this case perhaps, a cross-examination. I think, Mr Speaker, that we ought to remember that there is that balance between the rights of the accused and the rights of the child in these circumstances.
I note that under clause 6(1) of the Bill the order for closed-circuit giving of evidence cannot be made unless there is a communication between those two places, between the anteroom and the courtroom. The people in the courtroom must be able to both see and hear the people in the other place, that is the anteroom, but the people in the anteroom need only hear, but not necessarily see and hear, those in the courtroom. That is some slight compromising of that interaction which traditionally occurs in courts between counsel, judges, the accused, the victims and those who are giving evidence.
I indicated, Mr Speaker, that this is a trial. We will see whether it succeeds as the first step towards establishing this method of giving evidence on a permanent basis. I note also that there is an extension of this legislation now from many of the Magistrates Courts and certain
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .