Page 4027 - Week 13 - Thursday, 10 November 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Unlike in other jurisdictions, this Bill does not require a sexual assault complainant to satisfy the court that she or he will suffer severe trauma or intimidation, before being able to use closed-circuit television. In the Territory a similar requirement was applied to children and was removed in 1992 upon amendments recommended by the Australian Law Reform Commission. There are three reasons why the Bill does not contain this requirement. First, it would be inconsistent with the scheme currently applying to children, leading to unnecessary complexity and perhaps confusion. Secondly, research indicates that most, if not all, sexual assault complainants are traumatised and/or intimidated by the prospect of giving evidence in court, and actually having to do so especially in the presence of the accused. Those who are not would presumably choose not to use the facility. Lastly, and in line with the reasoning of the Australian Law Reform Commission, a procedure which gives rise to protracted legal argument, delay and the requirement that complainants be exposed to additional assessment simply to determine whether they should be able to use closed-circuit television defeats the purpose of the legislation.
Under this Bill, the provisions of the existing Evidence (Closed-Circuit Television) Act apply to complainants. The court has a discretion not to allow the use of closed-circuit television where this would cause unfairness to the accused or cause unreasonable delay or where the witness expresses a wish not to use closed-circuit television. Under this Bill, the judge must still direct the jury not to draw any adverse inference against the accused by reason of the fact that the complainant's evidence is given in this way. I commend the Bill to the Assembly and present the explanatory memorandum.
Debate (on motion by Mr Humphries) adjourned.
DENTISTS (AMENDMENT) BILL 1994
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General and Minister for Health) (11.20): Mr Deputy Speaker, I present the Dentists (Amendment) Bill 1994.
Title read by Clerk.
MR CONNOLLY: I move:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
I seek leave to have my speech incorporated in Hansard.
Leave not granted.
MR CONNOLLY: I will enlighten you all about dentists.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .