<!--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="2013-05-02" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>52</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>2</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="5383" />
  <endPage num="5578" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Child Protection</name>
      <text id="20130502448920639ab9474aa0000399">
        <heading>CHILD PROTECTION</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="3124" kind="question">
        <name>Mr PISONI</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Unley</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2013-05-02">
            <name>CHILD PROTECTION</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2013-05-02T14:17:00" />
        <text id="20130502448920639ab9474aa0000400">
          <timeStamp time="2013-05-02T14:17:00" />
          <by role="member" id="3124">Mr PISONI (Unley) (14:17):</by>  My question is again to the Attorney-General. Does the Attorney-General believe it is in the community's interest for the identity of the alleged offender at the centre of the Debelle inquiry to be disclosed so that other alleged victims or more information may come forward?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1810" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. J.R. RAU</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Enfield</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Deputy Premier</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Attorney-General</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Planning</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Industrial Relations</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Business Services and Consumers</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2013-05-02">
            <name>CHILD PROTECTION</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2013-05-02T14:18:00" />
        <page num="5414" />
        <text id="20130502448920639ab9474aa0000401">
          <timeStamp time="2013-05-02T14:18:00" />
          <by role="member" id="1810">The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Business Services and Consumers) (14:18):</by>  I thank the honourable member for that question. The situation as I understand it is that this particular individual is both in custody presently and the subject of other charges. That being the case, and by reason of the nature of those charges, the law says—under section 71A, I believe from recollection, of the Evidence Act—that the default position is that the identity of that individual is not to be published.</text>
        <text id="20130502448920639ab9474aa0000402">However, as a result of amendments that were put through this parliament in the last six to 12 months, anybody who wishes to change that state of affairs may make application to the court and the court may, if it considers it in the public interest to do so, then make an order that the name of the individual may be published.</text>
        <text id="20130502448920639ab9474aa0000403">In particular answer to the honourable member's question: (1) my opinion on the matter is irrelevant because, whatever I think, it is a decision that is to be made by a court, not by me; and (2) anyone who holds to that opinion is entitled by law to approach the court to seek an appropriate order, and it would then be a matter for them to persuade the court it was in the public interest for the court to do so.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>