HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2013-05-02 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

CHILD PROTECTION

Mr PISONI (Unley) (14:17): 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?

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): 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I believe from recollection, of the Evidence Act—that the default position is that the identity of that individual is not to be published.

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.

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.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT