House of Assembly Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Court Proceedings COURT PROCEEDINGS Ms CHAPMAN House of Assembly Bragg COURT PROCEEDINGS Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg) (15:08): As a supplementary question—and I am happy to address it to the Attorney-General or to the Premier—will he explain the difference in relation to civil proceedings between the Supreme Court in South Australia and the High Court? The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON House of Assembly Croydon Attorney-General Minister for Justice Minister for Multicultural Affairs Minister for Veterans' Affairs COURT PROCEEDINGS The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON (Croydon—Attorney-General, Minister for Justice, Minister for Multicultural Affairs, Minister for Veterans' Affairs) (15:08): A constitutional case concerning relations between the states and the commonwealth, concerning the Commonwealth Constitution, is inherently a matter of public and political interest. Ms Chapman House of Assembly Ms Chapman: Like bikie legislation. The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON House of Assembly The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: Indeed, that's right, and there is a difference between that and criminal matters, which in some cases are heard by juries, and the juries might be prejudiced or it might involve a substantial abridgment of the rights of an individual. We try not to prejudice a case so as to harm a particular individual. Mrs Redmond interjecting: The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON House of Assembly The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: I know that the Leader of the Opposition thinks that Paul Habib Nemer should never have spent a day in gaol and has told the house that, if she had been attorney-general, there would have been no appeal against the suspended sentence in the Nemer case. It is on the record and it is in the Heysen newsletter. The member for Bragg appears to be suggesting that, when a major constitutional challenge is taken, we should not talk about it. I do not agree.