Skip to main content
Home
  • Next sitting day is yet to be announced
    Next sitting day is yet to be announced

Parliamentary Questions


Question Without Notice No. 908 asked in the Legislative Council on 20 August 2024 by Hon Tjorn Sibma

Parliament: 41 Session: 1

EVIDENCE BILL 2024 — LONGMAN WARNING PROHIBITION

908. Hon TJORN SIBMA to the parliamentary secretary representing the Attorney General:

I have won the jackpot! I refer to the introduction of the Evidence Bill 2024.

(1) On whose advice has the Attorney General relied in making provision to prohibit judges from providing juries with a Longman warning in criminal trials, rather than possibly modifying or limiting the circumstances in which the warning can be given?

(2) How does the Attorney General anticipate that the prohibition of the Longman warning could disadvantage a defendant's equivalent right to a fair trial?

Hon JACKIE JARVIS replied:

I thank the member for some notice of the question. I answer the question on behalf of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Attorney General The following response has been provided by the Attorney General.

(1) The Attorney General relied on advice from the Department of Justice that was informed by the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, particularly recommendation 65(a); views expressed by the Western Australian Court of Appeal in cases such as Anderson v Western Australia [2014] 46 WAR 363; and legislative reforms in other Australian states—for example, South Australian Evidence Act 1929, section 34CB; New South Wales Criminal Procedure Act 1986, section 294; and Victorian Jury Directions Act 2015, section 40.

(2) While the current form of the Longman warning has been abolished in the bill, clause 309 of the bill retains provisions to protect defendants who have experienced forensic disadvantage.