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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 03 Hansard (Thursday, 11 March 2004) . . Page.. 1142 ..

to make the seriousness of the offence a criteria ...

11. The appropriate time to be talking about being tough on crime is at the sentencing stage—when the offence has been proved.

The Law Society goes on to say:

12. The preferred position is that where the issue of a person’s liberty is at stake there should remain an onus on the prosecution to establish reasons why bail should not be granted. Incarceration is the most serious punishment available in our system of justice. Loss of liberty must not be treated lightly where the charge is untested and the facts of the allegation have not been determined.

In conclusion, the Greens will not be supporting this legislation because we are not convinced at all by the arguments that have been put. Having reading the Law Reform Commission arguments on this, too, I do not think they are particularly strong. In paragraph 91, page 35, the commission states:

91. The retention of a presumption in favour of bail for offences as grave as murder seems strikingly incongruous when section 9A now provides that a person charged with a ‘serious offence’ alleged to have been committed whilst on bail for another serious offence must be refused bail save in special or exceptional circumstances.

The commission is using that as an argument for this; but, if we didn’t agree with that originally, then obviously that is not an argument. The preceding couple of paragraphs, which apparently support this approach, I do not see as being strong at all. They do not provide any evidence at all that we are having problems with people absconding or committing further murders or crimes while on bail.

MR STANHOPE (Chief Minister, Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment and Minister for Community Affairs) (8.44), in reply: It was the Labor government in 1992 that introduced the Bail Act to the Australian Capital Territory. At the time, the Bail Act was the most significant piece of criminal law to be considered by the Assembly. The original act consolidated a number of sources of law and created a coherent method for determining bail decisions. Once again we are working through this important and sensitive area of law.

Bail is a side of law where two important principles of democratic government intersect. Democratic governments are obliged to protect the liberty of the individual and protect the community at large. We are obliged to uphold freedom from unlawful detention and freedom from crime. The government has applied these democratic principles in developing the Bail Amendment Bill.

To make it clear that the Bail Act covers bail decisions about offenders who have breached punitive orders, I foreshadow government amendments to the Bail Amendment Bill during the detail stage of debate. The amendments will enable the court to make bail decisions about offenders who breach punitive orders such as recognizances, community service orders, home detention and periodic detention. The presumption towards bail for

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