<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>House of Assembly</name>
  <date date="2010-11-11" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>52</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="2021" />
  <endPage num="2064" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding>
    <name>Ministerial Statement</name>
    <text id="2010111194badf8e5abb44e9b0000103">
      <heading>Ministerial Statement</heading>
    </text>
    <subject>
      <name>High Court Decision, Totani</name>
      <text id="2010111194badf8e5abb44e9b0000104">
        <heading>HIGH COURT DECISION, TOTANI</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="1810" kind="speech">
        <name>The Hon. J.R. RAU</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Enfield</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Attorney-General</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Justice</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Tourism</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <startTime time="2010-11-11T14:11:00" />
        <text id="2010111194badf8e5abb44e9b0000105">
          <timeStamp time="2010-11-11T14:11:00" />
          <by role="member" id="1810">The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Attorney-General, Minister for Justice, Minister for Tourism) (14:11): </by> I seek leave to make a ministerial statement.</text>
        <text id="2010111194badf8e5abb44e9b0000106">Leave granted.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1810" kind="speech" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. J.R. RAU</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="2010111194badf8e5abb44e9b0000107">
          <by role="member" id="1810">The Hon. J.R. RAU:</by>  Today, the High Court handed down a decision in the matter of Totani &amp; Anor v the State of South Australia in relation to the Serious and Organised Crime (Control) Act. This case involved a challenge by Mr Totani to a section of the act which was introduced in 2008 in response to the public's well-founded concerns about, in particular, the activities of outlaw motorcycle gangs. The High Court's decision involves complex constitutional law arguments that may have broad implications beyond section 14(1) of the Serious and Organised Crime (Control) Act.</text>
        <text id="2010111194badf8e5abb44e9b0000108">It is necessary for me and for those who advise me to carefully read the six separate judgements so as to fully understand exactly what the implications might be for this act and, possibly, other legislation. Obviously, I would have been a lot happier if the High Court had ruled in favour of the legislation as it now stands. That said, I am pleased that we will now have a secure platform on which to build our legislative response.</text>
        <text id="2010111194badf8e5abb44e9b0000109">South Australia was the first to enact this type of legislation to specifically tackle organised crime. Other states have followed South Australia's lead to varying degrees and so this ruling has national implications. Once we have weighed up the 186 pages that make up the judgement and have a clear view of the common threads in the majority judgements, we will be able to respond with some certainty.</text>
        <text id="2010111194badf8e5abb44e9b0000110">Let me be clear: most of the Serious and Organised Crime (Control) Act remains operational regardless of today's ruling. After due consideration and discussions with the Crown Solicitor, the Solicitor-General and the Commissioner of Police, I will advise cabinet and then the parliament as to what steps should be taken to effectively take up the government's battle against organised crime. I am confident that in the new year we will be able to bring to the parliament amendments that address those concerns.</text>
        <text id="2010111194badf8e5abb44e9b0000111">In the meantime, my advice to criminal gangs is, 'Don't start popping the champagne corks or cracking the Jim Beam yet,' our commitment to dealing with this scourge is unshaken. Our policy direction will not change, our support for the police will not change, and our determination to fight organised crime will not change. What may change and what may even need to be extended are the tools that we give to the police and prosecutors to do their job on behalf of the people of South Australia.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>