House of Assembly Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2) 54 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Bills Statutes Amendment (Bail Authorities) Bill Statutes Amendment (Bail Authorities) Bill Statutes Amendment (Bail Authorities) Bill Introduction and First Reading Introduction and First Reading The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN House of Assembly Bragg Deputy Premier Attorney-General The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General) (11:06): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Bail Act 1985, the District Court Act 1991, the Magistrates Court Act 1991 and the Supreme Court Act 1935. Read a first time. Second Reading Second Reading The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN House of Assembly Bragg Deputy Premier Attorney-General The Hon. V.A. CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General) (11:06): I move: That this bill be now read a second time. I rise to introduce the Statutes Amendment (Bail Authorities) Bill 2020. This bill amends the Bail Act 1985 to address the inefficiencies arising in relation to the hearing of bail applications before the court. The bill also amends the Bail Act 1985 by changing the point at which bail can be revoked where it is suspected that a person has breached their bail conditions from the point at which the court makes the order to the point at which the person is arrested. Part 2, clause 4 of the bill amends the Bail Act 1985 to make the District Court and Magistrates Court general bail authorities. Parts 3, 4 and 5 amend the Magistrates Court Act 1991, the District Court Act 1991 and the Supreme Court Act 1935 to provide the courts with express power to make rules relating to bail applications. Any necessary limitations on which court a bail application ought to be heard by will be provided within the rules of court instead of the legislation. This change aims to improve efficiency in the justice system and our courts, a key tenet of the government's justice agenda. The practical difficulties encountered for bail applications and the resulting inefficiencies were identified by the Chief Justice. I understand these are particularly problematic for bail applications made in the period after committal but before arraignment for indictable offences where the Magistrates Court commits a defendant for trial in the District Court. Those bail applications must be heard by the Magistrates Court because the District Court currently is not a bail authority under the Bail Act 1985. These amendments will allow for bail applications made between committal and arraignment to be heard by the District Court. This is the most efficient way of resolving the issue and improving case flow management. Beyond this key amendment, the bill makes a further amendment to the Bail Act. In an effort to better protect witnesses and victims of crime, clauses 5, 7, 8 and 9 of the bill respond to an issue regarding breaches of bail conditions occurring after a bail agreement has been revoked. Let me explain. Upon the granting of bail, a defendant enters into a bail agreement, which sets out a number of conditions upon which bail is granted. One important condition often included in a bail agreement identifies a person or persons whom a defendant must not contact or approach whilst on bail. Understandably, members will appreciate that these can be witnesses and, of course, victims of the alleged crime. Such conditions are protective in nature and designed to guard against harassment and intimidation, particularly of the class I have referred to. Presently, when a bail agreement is revoked, a defendant's right to be at large is revoked; however, so, too, are the conditions of the bail agreement. Accordingly, any breach of conditions occurring after the revocation of the bail agreement, including any contact made with a victim or witness, does not constitute an offence under section 17(1) of the Bail Act 1985. These amendments change the point at which bail is revoked from the point at which the court makes the order to the point at which the person is arrested. Currently, the court may revoke bail under sections 6, 18, 19A and 19B of the Bail Act 1985. All are amended by the bill to change the point of revocation to the point of arrest. However, clause 5 is drafted so that the power of the court to revoke a bail agreement immediately is reversed. There are occasions when a bail agreement is revoked and it is later established that no breach of the relevant bail conditions has in fact occurred. The amendments included in this bill provide for such circumstances. Where there has been no breach, the bail agreement is not taken to have been revoked and the defendant will be released unconditionally. 'Unconditionally' in this context means that no new bail conditions are imposed. However, the deemed revocation of the bail agreement is effectively reversed and the conditions of the original bail agreement will continue to apply. The efficiency and accountability of our courts and justice system are crucial. This bill also seeks to resolve the two issues which have arisen in our courts and have been identified by the Chief Justice. I thank him for his consideration and advice on these matters. I commend the bill to members and table the explanation of clauses. Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Brown.