From Peter Walsh MP 19 December 2008

From Peter Walsh 19 December 2008 received 24/12/08 in reply to my letter of the 20 October 2008

I refer to previous correspondence regarding "accountability of government Departments and loss of Human rights

Following my representation on you behalf to the attorney-General, I attach a copy of the response received from the Hon Rob Hulls, which explains that he is unable to provide legal advice to individual members of the public and therefore can not comment on your query regarding the accountability of Government Departments.

In response to your second query on the loss of human rights, specifically reserved pleas, Minister Hulls has advised that whilst the act has been changed so that a magistrate does not need to ask whether the accused wishes to reserve their plea, the accused however, retains the liberty not to speak in which case their plea will be taken to be not guilty. The right to freedom of expression is not affected by the change to the questions asked by a magistrate.

I hope this information answers your queries, and thank you for writing to me on this issue.

Yours sincerely
signed
Peter Walsh MLA

Now:- Attached letter from Attorney-General Rob Hulls dated 11 December 2008

Mr. Peter Walsh MLA
274 Campbell Street
Swan Hill Vic 3585\

Dear Peter Walsh

Criminal Procedure Legislation Amendment Act 2008

Thank you for your recent letter, dated 28th October 2008, regarding representations on behalf of Mr Les McDonald.

I note that Mr. McDoanld describes his concerns with the accountability of government departments as well as the impact of the Criminal Procedure Legislation Amendment Act 2008 on human rights in Victoria.

As you are probably aware, I can not give legal advice to individual members of the public. Members ao the Victorian Community can, however, obtain free legal assistance by contacting their Local Community Legal Centre. Information about Mr, McDonald,s nearest Community Legal Centre can be found at www.naclc.org.au.

The Criminal Procedure Legislation Amendment Bill was publicly debated by both Houses of Parliament in late 2007 and early 2008. That debate is publicly available in Hansard which can be accessed at www.parliament.vic.gov.au.


As you are aware, the scrutiny of acts and regulations committee {SARC}of parliament is specifically charged with the responsibility of reporting to parliament on whether any bill introduced into either House directly or indirectly is incompatible with the human rights set out in the charter of human rights.

Both houses of parliament had the benefit of a report on the bill from SARC which considered issues concerning the charter of human rights.Having considered matters raised by SARC,both houses of Parliament passed the bill.

In response to Mr Mcdonald's specific concern with reserved pleas, I note that before the Act was passed, the relevant procedure was for a Magistrate to ask the accused whether they wished to plead guilty,not guilty or if they wished to reserve their plea. The act changes this to mean that the magistrate no longer asks whether the accused,whether the accused wishes to reserve their plea.

An accused however remains at liberty not ot speak in which case their plea will be taken to be not guilty in accordance with the Charter rights concerning the presumption of innocence and according a person a fair trial.The right to freedom of expression is not limited by this change to the questions asked by a magistrate.

I trust this informationis of assistance to you.

Yours sincerely
signed
Rob Hulls MP
Attorney-General