News location:

Canberra Today 15°/17° | Thursday, March 28, 2024 | Digital Edition | Crossword & Sudoku

Changes to crimes bill raises concern

 

The ACT Legislative Assembly. Photo: Paul Costigan

THE ACT Law Society has come out and said it strongly opposes the changes to certain offences in the “Crimes Act and the Firearms Act” after the amendment of the “Crimes Legislation Amendment Bill 2019” was passed in the ACT Legislative Assembly today (August 1). 

The ACT Law Society says it’s specifically concerned about two aspects of the bill.

“In the first instance, the bill broadens the current definitions of ‘choke’, ‘strangle’ and ‘suffocate’ in the ‘Crimes Act 1900’,” says an ACT Law Society spokesperson.

“This means that actions that have been found by the courts to fall outside of the existing definitions of choke, strangle or suffocate may now do so.

“While the society makes no comment on the new definitions, it is most concerned that the changed definitions will apply to all proceedings regardless of when they were commenced or the date of the alleged offence. This effectively means that the expanded definitions will be applied retrospectively to matters that predate the passage of the bill.

“The society strongly opposes the retrospective application of the amended definitions and the retrospective application of the criminal law.”

Similarly, the ACT Law Society is concerned about changes to the bill amends of the “Firearms Act 1996”.

“A defendant must now prove that he/she held an interstate firearms licence or permit rather than the existing situation where the prosecution had to prove the person did not hold an interstate licence or permit,” says the spokesperson.

“Again, the changed onus of proof will apply to all proceedings regardless of when they were commenced or the date of the alleged offence.  This effectively means that the reversal of the onus of proof will be retrospectively applied to matters that predate the passage of the bill.

“The Society believes that the revised definitions in the ‘Crimes Act’ and the reversal of the onus of proof in the ‘Firearms Act’ should be effective from the date the legislation is notified and not earlier.

“The Society had called on the ACT government to reconsider the retrospective application of the two provisions. It is of continuing concern to the Society that an omnibus bill was again presented to the Assembly on the basis that it proposes only minor or technical changes, but when in fact significant issues arise from the bill.

“The retrospective application of criminal offences is unfair, contrary to established legal principle and inconsistent with the ACT’s status as a human rights jurisdiction.  The retrospective application of a criminal offence is contrary to section 25 of the ‘Human Rights Act 2004’.”

In the Legislative Assembly today (August 1) Attorney-General Gordon Ramsay highlighted the success of the bill saying it follows the seizure of a criminal asset in Belconnen earlier this week.

Gordon Ramsay

“Firearms laws have been strengthened by simplifying prosecutions for unauthorised possession and use of firearms and the changes ensure that prosecutions are not delayed because of a technical argument,” he says. 

“We have also introduced mechanisms to support the operation of the National Unexplained Wealth Scheme that enables all participating jurisdictions to work together to effectively deprive criminals of their wealth, irrespective of the jurisdictions in which they operate.”

Who can be trusted?

In a world of spin and confusion, there’s never been a more important time to support independent journalism in Canberra.

If you trust our work online and want to enforce the power of independent voices, I invite you to make a small contribution.

Every dollar of support is invested back into our journalism to help keep citynews.com.au strong and free.

Become a supporter

Thank you,

Ian Meikle, editor

Share this

Leave a Reply

Related Posts

Follow us on Instagram @canberracitynews