Legislative Council Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1) 55 1 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Therapeutic Jurisprudence Therapeutic Jurisprudence The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI Legislative Council Leader of the Opposition Therapeutic Jurisprudence The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI (Leader of the Opposition) (14:27): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking a question of the Attorney-General regarding therapeutic jurisprudence. Leave granted. The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI Legislative Council Leader of the Opposition The Hon. N.J. CENTOFANTI: The Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration has released recommendations to endorse therapeutic jurisprudence in Australian courts. Therapeutic jurisprudence is concerned with establishing a positive experience for defendants, requiring presiding judges to consider social and psychological issues facing the offender. It encourages judges to be culturally competent, seeking to decrease the over-representation of Indigenous people in detention and improve rehabilitation prospects. While the recommendations claim that it is not designed for use in serious criminal matters or to excuse offender behaviour or argue for judicial leniency, there is much concern emerging from lawyers and legal sociologists that the reform would undermine existing legal principles embedded by the judiciary. My questions to the Attorney-General are: 1.	Does the Attorney-General endorse therapeutic jurisprudence? 2.	Does the Attorney consider that any enforcement of therapeutic jurisprudence would undermine existing legal principles? The Hon. K.J. MAHER Legislative Council Minister for Aboriginal Affairs Attorney-General Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Attorney-General, Minister for Industrial Relations and Public Sector) (14:28): I thank the honourable member for her question. It is kind of refreshing in a way to see that the opposition—we are only 2½ years into the term of government—have some sort of strategy in question time. It is not a very good or effective one, but at least it is a semblance of one: ask one minister questions one day then ask the next minister questions the other day. It is very cute, and bless them for having a tiny little bit of a strategy, despite its shortcomings. In the aim to try to pretend they have a strategy, someone has just read something online about something that they have never heard of and decided, 'Right, it's question day for the Attorney-General. Let's ask him this one.' I congratulate them for trying on their little strategy. It is great that they are attempting it. I am not aware of this concept. Because judicial organisations suggest it should be applied in South Australian courts, it is absolutely not necessarily going to become government policy. We expect courts to enforce the laws as we pass them in this parliament. Members interjecting: The President Legislative Council The PRESIDENT: Order! The two leaders, let's just get focused on the next question. The Hon. K.J. Maher interjecting: The President Legislative Council The PRESIDENT: Order! Attorney! The Hon. R.P. Wortley interjecting: The President Legislative Council The PRESIDENT: The Hon. Mr Wortley, get back in your box!