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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 9 Hansard (7 September) . . Page.. 3105 ..


Amendment negatived.

Clause 111 agreed to.

Clauses 112 to 115, by leave, taken together, and agreed to.

Clause 116.

MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (11.59): I move:

No 30-

Page 74, line 2, omit the clause, substitute the following new clause:

"116 Application of pt 2.7

A person is authorised by section 65 (Non-intimate forensic procedures authorised to be carried out) to carry out a forensic procedure under Part 2.7 (Carrying out of certain forensic procedures after conviction of serious offenders) on a serious offender only if-

(a) the serious offender is convicted of the serious offence concerned after the commencement of that section; or

(b) the serious offender was convicted of the serious offence concerned before the commencement of that section and, at that commencement, was-

(i) serving a sentence of imprisonment for the offence; or

(ii) subject to a parole order under the Parole Act 1976 or a similar order; or

(iii) subject to an order made by a court to be of good behaviour, whether or not the person has entered into a recognisance.".

Mr Speaker, this provision is designed to clarify the extent of the operation of the bill. It is an issue on which I was not certain when I looked at this legislation. At the moment, clause 116 provides:

A person is authorised by section 65 (Non-intimate forensic procedures authorised to be carried out) to carry out a forensic procedure...on a serious offender whether the serious offender was convicted of the serious offence concerned before, or is convicted of the serious offence concerned after, the commencement of that section.

It is not entirely clear to me, having regard to the definition of "serious offender", which is a person who is convicted of a serious offence, whether clause 116 has a retrospective application to people who are currently serving a sentence or who are currently on bail or on remand. It seems to me that we should be certain about the range of people to whom this legislation applies retrospectively and I am just not certain on that.

I do not believe that the provision is certain enough for us to be able to say that the legislation applies only to people currently serving a sentence as a result of a conviction for a serious offence or whether it extends to anybody who has been convicted at any time of a serious offence. It is just not clear to me. I believe that it needs to be clarified and that is all my amendment does.

We debated just yesterday or the day before the spent convictions legislation, the basic legislation designed to allow people to put behind them a criminal activity, a criminal behaviour or a misspent youth. It seems to me that this clause potentially negates the


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