SUMMARY OFFENCES AMENDMENT BILL 2001 Second Reading Speech

Northern Territory Second Reading Speeches

SUMMARY OFFENCES AMENDMENT BILL 2001

(This an uncorrected proof of the daily report. It is made available under the condition that it is recognised as such.)

Mr Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time.

The purpose of this bill is to amend the

to repeal the offence contained in section 56A of the act dealing with the possession, carriage and use of offensive weapons. The bill also amends section 61 of the act to ensure that the defence provision contained in that section operates more effectively.

As you are aware, the new

is being introduced in these sittings by the Minister for Police, Fire and Emergency Services the Hon Mike Reed MLA. This new bill will regulate the possession and use of weapons and includes offence provisions relating to the possession, use and sale of such weapons.

As it is intended that the new

will comprehensively deal with all offensive weapons and related offences, it is necessary to repeal the offence provision contained in section 56A of the

The bill also amends section 61 of the act. The recent case of

in the Northern Territory Supreme Court has highlighted a difficulty with section 61. Section 61(2) provides that a person who is found to have in their possession any property which ‘at any time before the making of a charge for an offence against this section in respect of the property, is reasonably suspected of having stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained, is guilty of an offence.’

Subsection (3) of section 61 then goes on to

provide a defence ‘if the defendant gives to the court a satisfactory account as to how the defendant obtained the personal property.’

The Supreme Court in

ase found that the relevant time for the purposes of the defence is the time of the taking of possession ie. the defendant need only show that he or she obtained the property lawfully. In

case the court relied on the South Australian decision of

in 1973. In that case the accused hired a caravan for a week and did not return it. Over a year later, he tried to sell it. Clearly, he originally took possession lawfully, by hiring the caravan. Despite his later unlawful dealings, the court held that his defence was successful because he had established that he ‘obtained possession of the property honestly.’

The bill thereby amends section 61(3) to address situations where a person takes possession of property and at a later time it becomes clear that the property is stolen or unlawfully obtained. The person then should have to give a satisfactory account of not only how the property has been obtained, but also how and why it was retained.

I commend the bill to honourable members.

[Index] [Search] [Bill] [Help]