Page 4819 - Week 16 - Monday, 25 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
One also has to look at the current situation. The current situation in the ACT, basically, is that if a defendant in the Magistrates Court does not have a knowledge of the English language that is sufficient to enable that person to participate in the proceedings, or is someone who has a hearing problem or a speaking problem, the court invariably makes arrangements to assist that person. As a practitioner, I have been involved in a number of cases where proceedings have been stopped and an interpreter has been found. This does occur and this legislation merely enhances and provides legislative backing for what has been a practice.
Secondly, in relation to Mr Collaery's Crimes (Amendment) Bill, I am indebted to Mr Connolly for showing me his advice from the Law Office because that, indeed, makes mention of the fact that it is police practice and in accordance with police instructions for a person who cannot speak English properly to be provided with an interpreter. In the Crimes (Investigation of Commonwealth Offences) Amendment Act 1991, which came into force on 1 November, there are some detailed provisions in relation to indictable offences and the provision of interpreters, and they may well in fact go a little bit further than Mr Collaery's Bill.
That Act is of particular concern because it also introduced the nefarious four-hour rule which has been shown to be totally inappropriate in the State of Victoria where it was introduced and only serves to hinder police investigation of serious offences. I certainly hope that the Commonwealth ultimately will see sense there before we have a lot of problems, both in the ACT, in terms of major fraud and especially major crime, and the other States, in terms of the investigation of Commonwealth offences. At any rate, there is provision there in the case of indictable offences, and that applies to the ACT, for an interpreter to have to be present.
Mr Collaery's Crimes (Amendment) Bill deals also with the situation of persons in custody. I think some of the concerns shown by the Government lawyers can be allayed, to an extent, in that that means that for most summary offences, and certainly most offences under such things as the Motor Traffic Act and other more minor Acts, persons are not in custody and the provisions of this Bill will not apply. However, if a course of conduct is serious enough for a person to be placed in custody - that has to be pretty serious in the ACT - and that person cannot speak English, there is a great necessity for an interpreter to be present to enable the police to go about their investigation and the charging of that particular person. That is commonsense; that is basically how the police operate.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .