Page 1586 - Week 05 - Thursday, 11 May 2006

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

seven days in preventative detention. We are simply following that approach because we believe it provides again for a proportionate approach to preventative detention and ensures that judicial oversight is maintained at reasonable frequencies.

The Supreme Court will be empowered to order detention, as I have indicated, for an initial maximum period of seven days and then can order detention for a further seven days, having fully reconsidered the matter. That is an appropriate level of scrutiny for what is an extreme step—to detain someone without charge. The government believes it is an important check on the rights and liberties of people who are in detention. The government will not support the Liberal Party’s amendment.

MR STEFANIAK (Ginninderra) (4.46): I will respond to the attorney. I hear what he says about the United Kingdom. I am not quite certain that the United Kingdom has the same provisions as we do. It might be necessary there, but our provisions are quite clear. Clause 22 (2) states:

(2) A preventative detention order (including an interim order) for a person ceases to have effect when whichever of the following first happens:

(a) the end of 48 hours after the order is made if the person has not been detained under the order;

(b) the end of—

(i) the period stated in the order as the period during which the person may be detained under the order; or

(ii) if the order is extended, or further extended, under division 2.4—the period as extended, or further extended;

(d) the order is set aside under division 2.6;

(e) the order ceases to have effect under section 101 (2) (Expiry of Act etc).

There seems to be ample provision for a court to order detention for a certain period. If it were within 14 days, if there were a need to extend it, the authorities would come back. I think it shows that there is ample provision here for the court to have considerable flexibility in detaining a person for whatever period of time it sees fit, up to and including 14 days, or indeed stopping short of 14 days with provision for someone to come back, if need be, to seek an order to extend it to the full 14 days. I just make that point. I note the government is going to oppose the amendment. I think I will leave it there.

Amendment negatived.

MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Minister for Planning) (4.48): I move amendment No 3 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 at page 1666]. Clause 21 lists the matters that must be contained in preventative detention orders. Two key aspects relate to the time an order commences and the time an order ends. Clause 21 (3) defines the end time for both single orders and successive orders. Clause 21 (3) (a) states that an order must end no later than 14 days

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