Posts Tagged attorney general
iTWire – NBN comes to the aid of bush lawyers
Posted by Metro in Uncategorized on March 11, 2012
Stuart Corner Tuesday, 06 March 2012 16:43
IT Policy – Government Tech Policy
Attorney-General Nicola Roxon and communications minister, senator Stephen Conroy have opened round one of the NBN Regional Legal Assistance Program, to help regional and remote community legal services take advantage of the NBN.
Conroy said the program would provide funding to support NBN-based trials to increase access to legal assistance in regional areas. the first round of funding will be allocated to legal assistance providers currently receiving Australian Government funding including legal aid commissions, family violence prevention legal services, Indigenous legal services and community legal services.
A total of $3.7m will be available over four years: $400k in 2011-2012 and $1.1m in each of the following three years.
Roxon said: “These grants will challenge applicants to identify innovative and collaborative ways of providing legal assistance and sharing knowledge more effectively with regional community legal services.”
The program aims to increase access to legal assistance or provide better support for professional staff in regional or remote areas; identify innovative NBN-based, collaborative ways of providing legal assistance services and support for professional staff and to share knowledge of these, including key success factors, within the legal assistance sector.
iTWire – NBN comes to the aid of bush lawyers
O’Farrell calls for national bikie laws
Posted by Metro in Uncategorized on February 22, 2012
AAP
NSW Premier Barry O’Farrell has called on Prime Minister Julia Gillard to introduce national anti-bikie laws, saying this would prevent them being overturned in the High Court.
The NSW government on Tuesday introduced new anti-gang laws into parliament, more than six months after 2009 laws were struck down by the High Court following a challenge by the Hells Angels.
The new legislation will fix a loophole in the Crimes (Criminal Organisations Control) Act 2009, a law which gives police the power to apply to the Supreme Court to have a gang outlawed.
Advertisement: Story continues below
Under the changes, Supreme Court judges will now have to give reasons for outlawing a gang, addressing a key concern raised by the High Court.
Mr O’Farrell said while Attorney-General Greg Smith had received advice that the new legislation would withstand a High Court challenge, national laws were the “only way to guarantee” state laws would not be struck down.
“(We are putting) in legislation that we believe to the best of our ability will not be successfully challenged in the High Court,” Mr O’Farrell said.
“But what Julia Gillard should be doing today, rather than worrying about the leadership challenge from Kevin Rudd, is getting drafted national outlaw motorcycle gang laws to stop this being a problem in the future.
“Because guess what? Outlaw motorcycle gangs are cashed up because of their illegal activities. They will mount further challenges to any state that legislates.
“The best way to guarantee that legislation can’t be challenged by the High Court is to have national legislation.”
Wayne Baffsky, the lawyer who acted for Sydney Hells Angel Derek Wainohu in the successful High Court challenge, said the updated law would be self-defeating.
“I haven’t seen the laws yet so I don’t know how bad they’re going to be,” he told AAP.
“But I can be confident that they are going to be unnecessary and probably self-defeating like the previous law.”
NSW Opposition Leader John Robertson said the premier had been dragged and shamed into re-introducing the anti-bikie laws, and should have acted sooner in response to the spate of Sydney drive-by shootings.
“We have been calling on Barry O’Farrell to recall parliament since early January because the police need all the support and all the laws they can get to deal with this issue,” Mr Robertson said.
Greens MP David Shoebridge described the proposed laws as “a further step in the wrong direction” and said there was a good chance the High Court would again reject them.
“This new law will likely do little to address gang violence and end up being a distraction from the real task of targeting gangs existing criminal activity.”
Meanwhile, South Australia’s Attorney-General John Rau has also promised to introduce tough new laws to crack down on bikie-related violence in the state.
They include re-formulating legislation to tackle outlaw gangs after the High Court struck it down in 2010, delivering a significant knock to former premier Mike Rann’s vow to rid the state of bikies.
DPP may appeal fine for crash that killed unborn child
Posted by Metro in Uncategorized on February 18, 2012
The Attorney General has requested a briefing from the Director of Public Prosecutions on the liklihood of a successful appeal of the sentence of a man with a history of domestic violence, who caused the death of his unborn child.
Matthew Silvestro pleaded guilty on Monday to dangerous driving causing grievous bodily harm after his former partner, who was eight months pregnant at the time, almost died when he drove the car they were travelling in head on into another vehicle in October 2009.
The pair’s then-two-year-old child survived the crash but the unborn child Silvestro’s former partner, Vanessa de Bari, was carrying died.
Advertisement: story continues below
Silvestro could not be charged in relation to the unborn child’s death because under WA law the baby must be born before it can be considered to be a victim of a crime.
The court heard Silvestro’s history of domestic violence included seven restraining orders against him by six former partners.
Ms de Bari spent more than eight months in hospital recovering from the car crash and still suffers brain damage, the court heard.
In sentencing at Joondalup Magistrates Court, Magistrate Brian Glustein fined Silvestro $8000 and disqualified him from driving for two years.
Attorney General Christian Porter said sentencing, particularly for violent offences, must better reflect community expectations.
He has requested a briefing from the DPP on the prospect of a successful appeal of Silvestro’s sentence.
“Domestic violence must first and foremost be dealt with by courts as very serious criminal offending warranting very significant sentences,” mr Porter said.
The Opposition also has requested the DPP consider an appeal.
Opposition spokeswoman for child protection Sue Ellery said the sentence was too lenient and appeared to ignore the severity of Ms de Bari’s injuries and the impact on her of losing the unborn baby.
“There were statements before the court that this relationship had been marked by domestic violence and therefore a fine without a term of imprisonment is inadequate,” she said.
“Failure to take into account offenders’ history of domestic violence sent the message that it was not a serious issue.
“Mr Silvestro’s extremely violent abuse of his previous partners was well known to police, hospitals and domestic violence agencies including at a ministerial level.
“Hospital records showed his violence against previous partners was horrendous while they were pregnant.”
Ms Ellery said the laws relating to domestic violence needed to be enhanced.
“Mr Silvestro’s case was not the first time women victims of domestic violence were let down by WA’s laws,” she said.
Mr Porter warned against politicising the case.
“Whilst I appreciate the dissatisfaction this sentence created, the DPP is required to determine whether an appeal has reasonable prospects of success and make a decision on that basis,” he said.
For the DPP to conduct an appeal on the basis of political pressure would plainly be a serious abuse of their position.
“For this reason, I do not have the power to direct the DPP to undertake appeals, and all sides of politics should be very careful that they do not politicize this decision making processes.”
Follow WAtoday on Twitter @WAtoday
Gaming Censorship in Australia – Syndicate’s Uphill Battle
Posted by Metro in Uncategorized on January 10, 2012
The Australian Classification Board (ACB) has labeled Starbreeze’s newest game Syndicate as “RC – Refused Classification”, meaning that, for the publisher to bring out the game in the land down-under, it must edit out some of its original content to bring down the level of explicit material to warrant a rating of MA15+ – something which EA have refused to do. Like the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB), the Australian Classification Board does not have the power to criminalize the domestic sale or production of any banned material, but the ACB is a body of the government and is supported by the federation, giving it the power to ban and restrict any material it sees fit. any game that receives an RC or becomes banned is placed on the Australian Customs and Border Protection Services Act list, which will stop any importing of restricted items and can carry a fine of up to $110,000.
The rating board has been a cause for debate for a number of years, as the ex Attorney General Michael Atkinson had repeatedly refused to introduce a new rating in the board to allow games to be less generalized. The ACB has maxed out the highest level of possible ratings to MA15+, which would cause any game that fell beyond that rating to automatically be refused classification and ultimately become banned.
Such a low limiting cap of ratings allowed any game that could be deemed to contain material beyond “strong in impact” to be refused classification and become banned in Australia. Atkinson has been quoted saying, “I don’t support the introduction of an R18+ rating for electronic games, chiefly because it will greatly increase the risk of children and vulnerable adults being exposed to damaging images and messages.” whichever side of the fence you fall on, it is difficult to deny the fact that such a loosely based system prohibits any form of adult content. as easy as it is to point to the immature and outrageous games that have been banned, and say this is the reason to stop the distribution of certain games, to try and justify the thought that all adults in their 30′s are entertained by the same subject matter as a 15 year old, is just absurd.
Below is a list of some games that have been surprisingly banned in Australia for various reasons.
Blitz: The League – Banned due to drug use related to incentives and rewards.
oKame – Refused classification due to relentlessly gory violence. An edited version has been released using the German cut. This version of game is now less violent than its predecessor which was released with a MA15+.
Fallout 3 - Originally banned because of drug use in relation to real world drugs and subsequent connection to its incentive/rewards. Edited world wide due to the insignificant change that was done (the name of morphine being changed to Med-x). therefore the same game that was rated 17+/18+ in other countries was rated MA15+ in Australia.
The film Industry has had ratings that go up to R18+ and X18+, which both are allowed to show content that goes beyond the MA15+ and allow “strong content” or pornography. while we are far from having a pornographic rating for the gaming industry, it is archaic to believe that gaming is solely an activity for children and teenagers. as such, on July 22nd of 2011, the Attorney-Generals met and came to a unanimous vote that would introduce the R18+ classification by the end of the year as reported. Although, to this date there seems to be no implementation of the new classification as the Australian Certification Board’s website still states:
Classifications of R 18+ and X 18+ are not applicable for computer games
While this is great news, it more than likely will not effect the RC rating given to Syndicate as the ruling will not be rolled back for previously banned games. Starbreeze can potentially remove enough content to be given another ruling, but EA is against the idea. Tiffany Steckler of EA Corporate Communications told Joystiq:
The game will not be available in Australia despite its enthusiastic response from fans. we were encouraged by the government’s recent agreement to adopt an 18+ age rating for games. However, delays continue to force an arcane censorship on games – cuts that would never be imposed on books or movies. we urge policy makers to take swift action to implement an updated policy that reflects today’s market and gives its millions of adult consumers the right to make their own content choices.
The archaic censorship on games is sadly something that looks to continue for some time, and will cost Australian gamers the chance to play games like Syndicate. what do you think of the country’s repeated censorship of games, when they allow violent and adult movies? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Bay of Pigs: Moti scandal disguises Australia shame
Posted by Metro in Uncategorized on December 29, 2011
Yesterday’s decision to trash the prosecution of a former Solomon Islands attorney general – though the end of a brutal four year battle for Julian Moti – may still prove an injustice by thwarting the full expose of the sordid ignominy out of which the affair arose.
The High Court emphatically pronounced that “Canberra” was complicit in illegally shoving Moti into a seat that had been “freed up” on the 3.10pm Solomon Airline 737 service from Honiara to Brisbane on 27 December 2007.
For that reason his subsequent indictment in the Queensland Supreme Court for sex-tourism crimes was tainted with an “abuse of process” and will be quashed.
The government’s case – it can only fairly be described as exactly that: a prosecution with all the worst features of Executive interference – spectacularly collapsed when it failed to clear the first hurdle, albeit that it took the scrutiny of three appeals for the debacle to materalise.
Revelations of the facts relating to other defence arguments and issues will prove equally shameful, if they can ever be fully brought to light.
First, the High Court left open the question for others to decide whether the curious payments of living expenses by the thoroughly discredited Australian Federal Police to crown witnesses would unfairly colour their evidence: “that issue could be the subject of suitable instructions to the jury” if the trial were to proceed.
Second, the law under which Moti was charged was enacted in 1994 to prevent Australian tourists and ex-pats going unpunished for child sex crimes committed in another country when that other country was unwilling or unable to prosecute.
It was never intended to be mis-used in the way it was: to harass a resident of another nation and where judicial process had already been engaged to determine the alleged offence.
If Moti was resident elsewhere at the time – as he was – on what basis can Australia claim to have properly interfered?
If the events were already been dealt with by a court elsewhere – as they were – why should he have been compelled to defend the charges again in Australia?
Third, Moti was a central figure in the government of former PM Sogovare that thumbed its nose at the Howard government’s do-what-we-say agenda in the Pacific. The popular unrest that brought Sogavare to power was seen byAustralia to be against its interests and those of the Regional assistance Mission (RAMSI) that was predominately led by the AFP.
Moti himself was seen as an antagonist of the new Solomon Islands PM who took power on 20 December 2007, just seven days before the illegal abduction. The Solomons’ government – with whom Australia was found to have conspired – “had more than once” been told by Canberra that it wanted Moti removed.
The extra-territorial application of a domestic law is controversial in itself. but to rope-collar a minister of a foreign government and extend a foreign law to depose him in his domicile to aid the establishment of a regime more favourably disposed to becoming a client state?
It is nothing other than Executive abuse in the extreme, so abhorrent, that it must be fully exposed and the perpetrators themselves offered a taste of justice.
Fourth, what exactly was the mission of the AFP in the latter part of 2007? To what extent did it operate as a para-military organ of arrogant and even illegal Australian foreign policy?
Abuse – and possibly, crimes – have been committed against mr Moti but also against the Solomon Islands people. Not to mention the ultimate integrity of this nation.
The full story must be told: what is our Bay of Pigs must not be allowed to brand us as Ugly Australians in the many eyes of the region.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading …
