About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

2 Current Issues Crim. Just. 10 (1990-1991)
Committal Reform: Radical or Evolutionary Change?

handle is hein.journals/cicj2 and id is 134 raw text is: COMMITTAL REFORM RADICAL OR EVOLUTIONARY CHANGE? The Hon. JA.R. Dowd, MP1 Attorney General for New South Wales As you are no doubt all aware, I am soon to put before Parliament proposals to replace committal proceedings as we now know them with a new scheme of pre-committal hearings. The finer details of that scheme are still being settled but the broad thrust of the proposals is well-known. Before I outline how I expect the new scheme to operate it may be helpful if I tell you something of the background to the proposed amendments. BACKGROUND TO REFORMS Early in 1989 my Department and I began to work on a Discussion Paper concerning various reforms to the criminal justice system. there were a number of reasons for the commencement of this work. The Chief Judge of the District Court, His Honour Judge Staunton, Q.C., and the Deputy Secretary of my Department, Mr Peter Webb, travelled together overseas and prepared a comprehensive report concerning criminal procedures in other common law jurisdictions. Mr Reg Blanch, Q.C., the Director of Public Prosecutions travelled overseas in late 1988 and early 1989 examining the prosecution process in both Hong Kong and the United Kingdom. He also prepared a comprehensive report on his findings. A further impetus for the re-examination of various aspects of the criminal justice system came from an assessment made by me and my Department of the problems faced by the criminal justice system. It was therefore decided that a Discussion Paper would be prepared which would outline a number of possible reforms to the criminal justice system. In preparing the Discussion Paper there was no single objective in mind. The proposed reforms were to have various objectives. Some, such as providing for mandatory disclosure of the prosecution case to the accused, were designed to promote the rights of the accused to receive a fair trial. Other proposals were intended to reduce delays whilst others were aimed at assisting victims where this was possible without impinging on the rights of the accused. The Discussion Paper was not prepared by a single individual and there were no pre-determined conclusions as to what the Discussion Paper would recommend. It was intended simply to be the basis for community discussion of the various issues. 1 Paper delivered at a public seminar entitled Committal for Trial and Pre-Trial Disclosure, convened by the Institute of Criminology, The University of Sydney, 11 April 1990

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most