Page 2005 - Week 06 - Thursday, 9 June 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
To conclude, I am happy on behalf of the Greens to support these positive amendments to the lifetime care and support scheme.
MR BARR (Molonglo—Chief Minister, Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development, Minister for Tourism and Events and Minister for Urban Renewal) (8.24), in reply: This bill furthers the government’s efforts to ensure that people who suffer life-changing injures on the roads or at work receive the care that they need. Supporting this bill is supporting better and more efficient services for our community, and I commend it to the Assembly.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.
Bill agreed to.
Supreme Court Amendment Bill 2016
Debate resumed from 5 May 2016, on motion by Mr Corbell:
That this bill be agreed to in principle.
MR HANSON (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (8.25): The opposition will be supporting this bill. It relates to double jeopardy.
In 2007 the Double Jeopardy COAG Law Reform Working Group presented to COAG its recommendations on double jeopardy law reform, prosecution appeals against acquittals and prosecution appeals against sentence. COAG agreed that jurisdictions would implement the working group’s recommendations.
The recommendations included the following: allowing the retrial of an acquitted person where there was fresh and compelling evidence that later became available, for example, DNA; allowing a retrial where an acquittal had been given due to the trial being tainted; and allowing prosecution of an administration of justice offence committed during a trial where such prosecution directly conflicts with the acquittal at that original trial.
The bill amends the rule of double jeopardy in the ACT by providing the following exceptions. A retrial will be allowed where there is fresh and compelling evidence that a previously acquitted person committed a very serious offence, that is, one punishable by life imprisonment. A retrial will be allowed where a trial has been tainted; for example, where a witness has committed perjury or the jury has been interfered with, resulting in an acquittal for a serious offence, that is, one punishable by 15 years or more.
The bill provides a third exception where an administration of justice offence has allegedly occurred during a trial and the accused is acquitted. Currently, the accused
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video