Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 12 Hansard (11 November) . . Page.. 3879 ..

MR MOORE (10.38): Here we go again! It was back in 1993 that Mr Humphries tried this on once before - the old thumping of the drum on law and order. That is the crunch of what we have here. What we have in this particular piece of legislation, the Crimes Act, at section 429, is a section that says:

Sentencing to be just and appropriate

429. (1) The sentence imposed by a court for an offence shall be just and appropriate.

(2) Without limiting the generality of subsection (1), the sentence shall, as far as practicable, be such as to -

(a) facilitate the offender's rehabilitation into society; -

in other words, a high priority that this Assembly has set -

and

(b) encourage the offender to make appropriate reparation to any victim of the offence.

But the judge can take other matters into account. Let us look at section 429A, subsection (1), paragraphs (f), (g) and so on. They can take into account:

(f) any action the person may have taken to make reparation for any injury, loss or damage resulting from the offence;

(g) the degree of responsibility of the person for the commission of the offence;

(h) the degree to which the person has cooperated, or undertaken to cooperate, with law enforcement agencies in the investigation of the offence or other offences;

(i) the deterrent effect ...

Well, here it is! It is in here, after all. I must be misreading. It says:

(i) the deterrent effect that any sentence or order under consideration may have on any person;

(j) the need to ensure that the person is adequately punished for the offence;

... ... ...

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .