Page 4274 - Week 14 - Tuesday, 29 November 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR HUMPHRIES (10.25): Madam Speaker, I will do that, in fact; I will make comments on both of these Bills tonight. The legislation before us is a significant package of legislation. It has certainly been a long time coming, and it is a little bit of a pity that it has to be dealt with in a relatively short space of time. I have the view that very often exposure drafts of legislation and even reports of committees such as the Community Law Reform Committee, where they are put forward in draft form for public debate, are important; but it is very often the case that those who are interested in the outcome do not actually contribute to the process of developing it but prefer to see what the end of this debate process is and then form a view. In my view, it is unfortunate that we should face a period of only two weeks or so between the introduction of this Bill and its passage; but I accept that it is important legislation. For that reason, it will be supported tonight by the Opposition without amendment.
I confess that some elements of the legislation cause me a little concern. I know that some elements cause concern as well to other people, because I have had discussions with members of the Law Society of the ACT. There is a variety of views within the Law Society, which is not surprising, given that lawyers make up the Law Society. That body has not tabulated its views in the time available. As a result, I have only their general comments to rely upon. I realise that the issues are complex; but they have been on the table for some time, given that this was a report of the Community Law Reform Committee tabled back in August 1993. My copy of this report does not include the draft legislation, even though the body of the report says that the legislation was an appendix - Appendix F, I think - to the report. I am not sure whether that is just my copy or whether everybody else is in the same boat, but I assume that this legislation in draft form has been available for some time. I seem to recall seeing it, but I am not sure whether it came to me on some other basis.
Madam Speaker, victims unquestionably deserve a bigger role in the pursuit of justice through our criminal justice system. To a large extent, victims have been viewed in the past, and are viewed even today, in a sense, as adjuncts to the process of resolving a criminal trial. They are a bit like exhibits or even tipstaffs; they are components of the process, but not the central object of the process. It is clear to me that victims deserve to be more than just that; they deserve to be one of the objects of the process of criminal justice. Their needs are one of the issues to be resolved by the criminal justice system. The focus needs to shift away from the exclusive focus of the past on the ascertainment of the guilt or innocence of an accused - that is, a focus on the accused person - to the additional, but not alternative, focus on the restoration of a victim's physical and emotional position in the community. It is hard for those of us who have not been in that position to know quite how they feel; but there is no doubt that that sense of alienation, of hurt and of frustration can be extremely profound. It is important that we do not exacerbate that sense of frustration and hurt by the way in which our criminal justice system deals with certain issues.
I have spoken in the last few days to one woman who would be described in the legislation as a secondary victim. She rang me to comment on some remarks made by a member of the bench in a matter that touched on the original crime which touched her life, and she was extremely angry and extremely upset by the comments that had been made by the bench. I can understand her position; I can understand how she would feel.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .