Victims of Crime Commissioner John Hinchey, urges The ACT government to commit to lifting time limitations that restrict victims of child sexual abuse from going to court.
(ACT = Australian Capital Territory
The ACT, like Washington, D.C. in the United States, is independent of any state, to prevent any one state from gaining an advantage by hosting the seat of Federal power. [5] Unlike Washington, however, the ACT has voting representation in the Federal Parliament, and has its own independent Legislative Assembly and government, similar to the states. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canberra )
Time to amend unjust statute
CT Editorial
- Date
- October 3, 2013
- Read later
Canberra Times
- in
The ACT government got a judicial wake-up call this week from Victims of Crime Commissioner John Hinchey, who urged it to commit to lifting time limitations that restrict victims of child sexual abuse from taking criminal action through the courts.
Mr Hinchey's request was intended to alert the ACT government to the fact that, with the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse having begun hearing the stories of Canberra people in private sessions on Wednesday, every effort must be made to open the way ''for victims of crime to report offences that have been committed against them''.
The period for which legal action may be taken in regard to certain offences in the ACT, including indecent assault, is just 12 months, and Mr Hinchey believes that this denies justice to people who choose not to report sexual abuse crimes immediately (usually out of shame, self-blame, embarrassment, fear of reprisal, family pressures and so on), but may wish to do so now that the issue is out in the open.
The ACT is not alone among the states and territories in having statutes of limitation on sex crimes - the reasoning based on the judicial idea that where there is delay ''the whole quality of justice deteriorates''. That is, with the passage of time, the fading of memories, the death of witnesses, and the disappearance of documents and so on, the prospects of a fair trial are considerably reduced. Yet the ACT stands out for the brevity of its statute of limitations on indecent assault, the result apparently of a legislative oversight in 1976.
There was a reminder of the ramification of this ''oversight'' in April 2012, when a Canberra man escaped prosecution for molesting his son despite making admissions to police. After the ACT Director of Public Prosecutions raised the matter, Attorney-General Simon Corbell said he had asked his directorate to ''look closely at the issue and consult with justice stakeholders''.
Some 18 months later, Mr Corbell is unable to say when the issue might be dealt with, save that the government will move on it this term. Mr Corbell is correct to point out that ''careful examination is necessary before any retrospective amendment to criminal procedure law is made'', but with the federal government having urged states and territories to lift time limitations as far back as 2004, some people may be forgiven for pondering the Attorney-General's procrastination.
Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/ct-editorial/time-to-amend-unjust-statute-20131002-2uszp.html#ixzz2gc0RZvkHment