Page 4240 - Week 14 - Thursday, 24 October 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
introduced by the Government were proposed and a number adopted. There were elements of compromise between the political parties. Of this I make no criticism whatsoever, for it is the way, as Socrates once put it, "of our imperfect, but beloved, democracy".
When passed the Act committed the NCA to private hearings where witnesses were examined. No alternative was provided. True it was, that provision was made for the presence of lawyers to represent witnesses at such hearings and for the proceedings to be reviewable in the Federal Court, but cries of "Star Chamber" in connection with these proceedings have plagued the NCA since its inception. So, too, another provision of the Act, section 51, prohibited any Member of the Authority or its staff, except for the purposes of the Act, from divulging or communicating to any person information acquired in the performance of duties, under pain of heavy penalty, including imprisonment.
I trust that my Liberal colleagues are listening, because in a moment I am going to read into the record their Federal Liberal approach to this. His Honour continued:
This section has caused grave problems between the National Crime Authority and another Parliamentary Committee set up under the Act. This is the Parliamentary Joint Committee and is composed of members of both Houses of Federal Parliament. In simple terms it is the Parliamentary watch-dog of the NCA. In times past persons connected with the Authority have regarded section 51 as binding in relation to their dealings with this Committee and have, on occasions, declined to answer questions before it. I think it is fair comment to say that the relationship between this Committee and the NCA over the last six years, while satisfactory at times, has always been overshadowed by the problem of section 51. Conflicting legal opinions have been obtained on the question of whether the provisions of section 51 have application to inquiries by the Parliamentary Joint Committee.
I interpolate here to say that I have those conflicting legal opinions. I am prepared to make those available to colleagues in this chamber. His Honour went on to say:
Having regard to the clear view I have formed as to what the relationship between the Authority and this Committee should be, it is not necessary for me to express any view as to which of these opinions is to be preferred.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .