HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2)
2017-05-31 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Courts Administration Authority

Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (14:53): My question is to the Attorney-General. Who is responsible for not having a courtroom available last Friday to hear a community victim impact statement from the people of Fregon in the case of the murdered nurse, Gayle Woodford?

The Hon. J.R. RAU (Enfield—Deputy Premier, Attorney-General, Minister for Justice Reform, Minister for Planning, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Child Protection Reform, Minister for the Public Sector, Minister for Consumer and Business Services, Minister for the City of Adelaide) (14:53): I thank the deputy leader for her question. It is a very important question.

Mr Knoll: One that you haven't addressed for a long time; 1,200 prisoners on remand in prison.

The SPEAKER: The member for Schubert has earned a second warning. Attorney-General.

The Hon. J.R. RAU: This is actually a very important question—

The Hon. J.M. Rankine interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Wright, I call to order.

The Hon. J.R. RAU: This is an important question because we have a circumstance here of a shocking crime against a person who was actually attempting to provide a very important service to a community, and we have a situation where the court was seeking to hear the understandable impact of this horrendous crime on the victim's family. I think everybody would understand how important it was that that occur and that it occur in a way that was sensitive to the needs of that family. Everyone understands that, particularly me.

The actual circumstances, though, go to this: some years ago, during the time, I think, of the Hon. Christopher Sumner being attorney-general and, I think, possibly at the urging of a former attorney-general in the form of the Hon. Len King, more latterly Chief Justice King, there was established in South Australia something that was and remains largely unique called the Courts Administration Authority. This was established by statute.

It means that in South Australia, unlike in every other part of the commonwealth, the courts administration is not something that is controlled by the Department of Justice or the Attorney-General's Department, as the case might be from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but is completely independent of the attorney-general of the day, is not subject to the management or direction of the attorney-general of the day and is a completely separate entity from the perspective of budget but also from the perspective of management. In fact, the Courts Administration Authority is managed by the courts themselves, and the authority is chaired by the Chief Justice and includes the heads of the other jurisdictions. They routinely meet and transact business as they wish to do, to do with all matters relating to courts.

Mr Speaker, as you might recall from your past experience, the courts rather jealously police the boundary between the Courts Administration Authority and anybody else, in particular the Attorney-General's Department. In that context, it is the case that the Courts Administration Authority is therefore responsible, amongst other things, for the routine management of the availability of its facilities, which include courtrooms.

The Courts Administration Authority, for example, would be in charge of the notion of whether or not court A, B or C was occupied between particular hours of the day on particular days of the week and expected to have particular judges or cases heard in those courtrooms. That is something which is entirely within their control. I can assure members that, if I were even to assert an interest in managing that, I would receive a fairly stern response from the judiciary about where my business ended and theirs began.

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