Law Council Update

MAG prioritises key issues of concern

The Law Council of Australia is pleased the Meeting of Attorneys-General agreed work priorities for 2022 and beyond include improving Indigenous justice outcomes, addressing coercive control, sexual assault and harassment, raising the age of minimum criminal responsibility, and model defamation reform.

“Each of these issues must be addressed without undue delay and we welcome the commitments stemming from Friday’s MAG,” Law Council of Australia President, Mr Tass Liveris said.

“We reiterate our position that the minimum age of criminal responsibility should be 14 and there should be no carve outs.

“The Law Council has advocated for national harmonisation regarding a definition of family violence and to recognise that it includes coercive control. We look forward to contributing to the planned consultation on National Principles to Address Coercive Control.

“It was also encouraging to see the Attorneys throw their support behind the Stage 2 Review of the Model Defamation Provisions. The Law Council has previously called for governments to see this review through to completion.

“The Model Defamation Provisions review into the liability of internet intermediaries has been a substantial and in-depth process and it has the potential to ensure that reforms to the law of defamation in Australia are developed in a way which is comprehensive, complementary, certain and clear.

“Particularly welcome from the MAG is the decision to make improving Indigenous justice outcomes a standing agenda item.

“First Nations people fare worse at every stage of the criminal justice process. They are much more likely to be questioned by police; charged by police with a criminal offence; arrested than proceeded against by summons; held on remand in prison than given bail; convicted at trial; and sentenced to imprisonment.

“We hope to see the nation’s AttorneysGeneral make substantive progress towards addressing these important issues when they meet again in three months under the banner of the Standing Council of Attorneys-General.”

Judicial impartiality critical to procedural fairness

The Law Council of Australia welcomes the recommendations contained in the Australian Law Reform Commission’s report ‘Without Fear or Favour: Judicial Impartiality and the Law on Bias’ which was publicly released today. “This report calls for some significant changes that the Law Council has long been advocating for,” Law Council of Australia President, Mr Tass Liveris said. “In particular, we support the ALRC’s call for the establishment of a Federal Judicial Commission.

“Since 2006, the Law Council has advocated for the creation of a standalone Federal Judicial Commission to provide a clear and structured framework for responding to complaints directed to the judiciary.

“As recommended by the ALRC, this body would also play a critical role in supporting judicial impartiality and public confidence in the administration of justice.” The ALRC report notes that establishing a Federal Judicial Commission would be a significant reform which requires its own policy development process, including further broad consultation. The Law Council calls for the Government to support the establishment of a Federal Judicial Commission, to establish a consultation process regarding its design, and to ensure that it is adequately resourced to enable it to carry out its functions efficiently and effectively. The Law Council also notes the ALRC’s recommendations relating to improved procedures and guidance to assist federal courts and parties to address potential bias issues as they arise. This is an important step in fostering confidence in the independence of the judiciary.

“It is critical that there be clarity and transparency on procedures relating to bias, to assure court users that such issues can be dealt with in a fair and effective manner,” Mr Liveris said.

“The Law Council also strongly supports the report’s recommendations aimed at increasing transparency in the judicial appointment process, promoting diversity in the judiciary and improving cultural competency.

“We look forward to further considering Recommendation 6 and working with the Council of Chief Justices of Australia and New Zealand to review relevant rules and guidance on conduct in light of the High Court of Australia’s decision in Charisteas v Charisteas [2021] HCA 29.”