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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 6 Hansard (19 June) . . Page.. 2139 ..

MR STANHOPE (continuing):

review the provisions of the Bail Act to determine whether they are best suited to the public interest and particularly the interests of victims of crime;

identify how successfully the provisions of the Bail Act are operating;

identify appropriate criteria, if not already identified, for the grant of bail and the discretion for various offences, as appropriate, exercised by police or members of the judiciary and under what circumstances;

determine whether amendments to the Bail Act should be recommended and identify and make recommendations on any associated issue that the commission considers relevant; and

in undertaking the reference to consult with members of the community, have regard to their views.

The commission released its report on 13 July 2001. I would like to take the opportunity to thank the commission for its work. In preparing its response to the commission's report, the government sought the views of members of the public and key stakeholders, including the DPP, the AFP, the Legal Aid Office, the Women's Legal Centre, the Victims of Crime Co-ordinator, the Law Society, the Bar Association, the Domestic Violence Crisis Service, the Domestic Violence Prevention Council and ACT Corrective Services. I thank all agencies and individuals who provided submissions for their contributions to the reform process.

The government has given careful consideration to the reforms recommended by the commission. The majority of the commission's 25 recommendations are supported by the government and will be addressed through amendments to the Bail Act and associated legislation. It is expected that the amendments will be introduced later this year. Most of the recommendations deal with minor or technical issues concerning the operation of the bill. The six remaining recommendations entail more significant policy changes. While the government is prepared to support three of the recommendations, either wholly or in part, it does not support recommendations 8, 9 or 12.

Recommendation 8 advocated a reversal of the presumption in favour of bail for specific serious offences so that there would be a presumption against bail for those offences. The government does not believe that a presumption against bail is justified except in relation to murder, attempted murder and accessory to murder. We consider that the severity of the consequences for an offender found guilty of such offences creates a greater risk of absconding or interfering with a witness than would arise for less serious offences.

When the ACT introduces its own drug trafficking offences, the government will also consider providing a presumption against the grant of bail for those offences, as the link between organised crime and most drug trafficking in Australia considerably increases the risk of the accused person absconding, interfering with witnesses or re-offending before the trial.

For other serious offences listed by the commission, the government will not reverse the presumption in favour of bail. Instead, it is proposed that there be no presumption either way. In the absence of any presumption it will be up to the prosecution and the defence to persuade the court that bail should or should not be granted to the accused. Bail decision makers will consider all the available evidence, tendered by both the

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