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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 8 Hansard (27 October) . . Page.. 2239 ..

MR HUMPHRIES: I move:

That this Bill be agreed to in principle.

This Bill makes amendments to the Evidence (Closed-Circuit Television) Act 1991 to ensure that complainants in sexual offence matters are able to utilise closed-circuit television facilities to give evidence in ACT courts. It may assist the Assembly if I can give some of the history of the Act.

It is an Act which enables evidence in proceedings before an ACT court to be given by certain classes of witnesses by closed-circuit television. When it was enacted in 1991, it gave effect to recommendations of the Australian Law Reform Commission, which had done - - -

Ms Tucker: Can you speak up, Gary? Are you sick?

MR HUMPHRIES: I have a sore throat. I am sorry. I will speak a bit closer to the microphone. It is an Act which enables evidence in proceedings before an ACT court to be given by certain classes of witnesses by closed-circuit television. When it was enacted in 1991, it gave effect to recommendations of the Australian Law Reform Commission, which had done a considerable amount of work looking at children as witnesses. The Act was initially limited in its operation to child witnesses, other than where the child is the accused. The ALRC research strongly supported use of closed-circuit television for child witnesses to reduce stress and improve the quality of evidence given by child witnesses.

After the legislation was enacted in the ACT, further work was undertaken by the ALRC to evaluate its impact and effectiveness. The evaluation study suggested that the use of closed-circuit television lowered anxiety in child witnesses and found that children who used it found testifying easier. In 1994, the former Labor Government amended the Act, pursuant to a recommendation of the then ACT Community Law Reform Committee, to extend the operation of the Act to complainants in sexual offence matters. This was done on the basis that complainants in sexual offence matters routinely experience trauma and stress in appearing in court.

It is important to note that the ACT provisions differ from those elsewhere, in that in the ACT complainants in sexual offence matters, as well as child witnesses, were able to use CCTV to give their evidence without having to establish that giving evidence in court would cause trauma, distress or fear. I will return to this later in my remarks as I think there is a need for further consideration of this approach.

The extension of the Act to complainants in sexual offence matters was expressed to be for a trial period of 18 months, during which the impact of the technology on trials was to be evaluated under the auspices of what has since become the Law Reform Commission. The evaluation was intended to look at issues including whether the use of CCTV disadvantaged an accused person or diminished the impact of a complainant's evidence.

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