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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 14 Hansard (9 December) . . Page.. 4974 ..

MR STEFANIAK (continuing):

Luckily, she lived; and Hudd received a considerable period of time in jail for attempted murder as a result.

That really brought home to Mr Justice Kelly the importance of protecting the community, given his approach to the issue after that. It is a difficult issue. That was a bit of a landmark case in terms of the need for courts to be very cautious in regard to ensuring that the rights of criminals are balanced by the legitimate rights of the community and the legitimate expressions by police and prosecutors of the danger an accused might be if released.

In 1992 we had our first real bail act and there were a number of problems with it. I note from the report which the Attorney-General has tabled that he does not support recommendation 9, basically for the good reason that it was overtaken by amendments in 2001. One of the biggest problems we have had in the territory, apart from the complaints that you get anywhere about persons being let out on bail when lots of people think they should not, is with the revolving door situation, especially in instances where repeat offenders appear in court, are granted bail and very soon afterwards are back in court, having been charged with more offences.

In fact, I have heard stories of people who were granted bail several years ago after going to court for, say, 15 counts of stealing cars. In one instance, some bloke stole a car outside the court after he was given bail and drove himself home. Fairly soon he was back in front of the court, but again got bail because of the presumption in the act in favour of bail. At present, that presumption even applies to murder and serious crimes like that.

Section 9A was introduced by me for the previous government in relation to serious offences. I am pleased to see that this government has seen the sense in that, probably grudgingly because it goes against some of the normal left wing, overly excessive, civil libertarian leanings you get with some Labor governments, whilst not supporting recommendation 9 of the Law Reform Commission. In previous debates I have read out the names of the members of the commission who made this report. I am not going to do that again; members can refer to Hansard for that.

The commission has recommended a presumption against bail for offenders who commit serious offences, which is something that has been taken up by section 9A. Whilst this government says that it is reviewing that, I think that the evidence shows quite clearly that it has been a very significant part of the act, especially for burglary, armed robbery and a number of serious offences, and has lessened the incidence of those offences in our community, simply because repeat offender who commit further offences whilst on bail have been remanded in custody pending the disposal of their matters. It is quite clear that that has worked. Anyone on the police force will tell you that. Most people who operate in the court system will do so as well, even though there might be a few there who do not particularly like it because of their excessive civil libertarian views.

Mr Speaker, there are a number of other recommendations and issues in relation to this paper. I think it is unfortunate that the government has not supported recommendation 8. Again, I have read it out and we have had a debate on it in terms of a bill I brought before the Assembly to faithfully replicate that recommendation. It is interesting that the Chief Minister and Attorney-General has indicated that he will do something there.

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