Mr BALCH - 1998-02-24
Last Friday, a landmark decision was made in our Territory courts. Like myself, I am sure most honourable members will have heard considerable community concern expressed through their electorate offices and by the community in general. Following his acquittal on Friday, Galurrwuy Yunupingu claimed that he was acting like a policeman in asking the photographer, Mr McCrostie, for $50 for having taken the photographs. Mr Yunupingu equated his actions to those of a policeman fining someone for not wearing a seatbelt. Can the minister advise whether it would be considered lawful for a police officer to destroy a film, damage a camera, assault a photographer and demand $50 with menaces?
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I am sure members opposite would also have received many approaches from people over the past few days since this decision was handed down, expressing concern, particularly about the comments made by Mr Yunupingu and the suggestion that cultural law stands side by side with Territory law. I tell Territorians that it does not. I tell Territorians that the law, as written, will be applied equally to all Territorians. In fairness, that is the only way that the law can operate.
Members opposite have been strangely silent on this matter. When there is a tough issue to be dealt with and commented on, they go underground. They make no comment and do not represent Territorians on these very important issues. If a policeman were to follow the example set by Mr Yunupingu, in destroying film, damaging a camera ...
Mr BAILEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! While I have no problems in debating this issue, my understanding is that, under standing order 112, ministers should not give a legal opinion.
Madam SPEAKER: It is an answer to a question. I do not think he is giving a legal opinion.
Mr BAILEY: The question is whether or not a police officer doing this would be breaking the law. It is a legal opinion. I am quite happy for the issue to be debated. However, members on both sides cite standing orders frequently - whether it is because I call him a liar, which I am not allowed to do except by way of a substantive motion or ...
Mr Stone interjecting.
Mr BAILEY: The rules are that you ...
Mr Coulter: There is no legal opinion required ...
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, please ensure that you do not give a legal opinion.
Mr REED: Madam Speaker, if the police were to follow the example set by Mr Yunupingu, the member would be the first to say that it was shameful and call for the police
Page 3
not to act in that way, and quite rightly so. As we have seen in years past, members opposite have taken exception to laws being made in this House such as rulings for police to seize liquor in circumstances where there is public disorder resulting from alcohol use. That was a lawful action, yet members opposite opposed it.
In this case, I can assure Territorians that police will not be following the example set by Mr Yunupingu. He said: 'I do not carry with me a mob of policemen. I police my tribal land myself'. Mr Yunupingu will be in for a rude shock if he starts applying the law in his own way. He is not a policeman. Wherever he goes in the Northern Territory, if he thinks someone has transgressed the law, it is his duty as a responsible Territorian to report that suspected transgression to the police and have it investigated. I do not condone in any way any Territorians taking the law into their own hands. The police certainly will not be acting in the very irresponsible way that I believe Mr Yunupingu acted. The law will be applied equally to all Territorians. I suggest ...
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr REED: I am speaking on behalf of Territorians who have expressed concerns to me and to other members about the comments by Mr Yunupingu. This House has a responsibility to make it clear to all Territorians that, although they believe they are acting within their culture, they must also consider that they have to act within the law. The law will be applied equally to all Territorians. It is a great shame that members opposite cannot appreciate the need for that. If we departed from that process, which has been long established and long respected in this country, we would have civil unrest for which the opposition alone would be responsible, judging from the attitudes indicated in the interjections that they continue this morning.
Page 4
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, I am sure members opposite would also have received many approaches from people over the past few days since this decision was handed down, expressing concern, particularly about the comments made by Mr Yunupingu and the suggestion that cultural law stands side by side with Territory law. I tell Territorians that it does not. I tell Territorians that the law, as written, will be applied equally to all Territorians. In fairness, that is the only way that the law can operate.
Members opposite have been strangely silent on this matter. When there is a tough issue to be dealt with and commented on, they go underground. They make no comment and do not represent Territorians on these very important issues. If a policeman were to follow the example set by Mr Yunupingu, in destroying film, damaging a camera ...
Mr BAILEY: A point of order, Madam Speaker! While I have no problems in debating this issue, my understanding is that, under standing order 112, ministers should not give a legal opinion.
Madam SPEAKER: It is an answer to a question. I do not think he is giving a legal opinion.
Mr BAILEY: The question is whether or not a police officer doing this would be breaking the law. It is a legal opinion. I am quite happy for the issue to be debated. However, members on both sides cite standing orders frequently - whether it is because I call him a liar, which I am not allowed to do except by way of a substantive motion or ...
Mr Stone interjecting.
Mr BAILEY: The rules are that you ...
Mr Coulter: There is no legal opinion required ...
Madam SPEAKER: Minister, please ensure that you do not give a legal opinion.
Mr REED: Madam Speaker, if the police were to follow the example set by Mr Yunupingu, the member would be the first to say that it was shameful and call for the police
Page 3
not to act in that way, and quite rightly so. As we have seen in years past, members opposite have taken exception to laws being made in this House such as rulings for police to seize liquor in circumstances where there is public disorder resulting from alcohol use. That was a lawful action, yet members opposite opposed it.
In this case, I can assure Territorians that police will not be following the example set by Mr Yunupingu. He said: 'I do not carry with me a mob of policemen. I police my tribal land myself'. Mr Yunupingu will be in for a rude shock if he starts applying the law in his own way. He is not a policeman. Wherever he goes in the Northern Territory, if he thinks someone has transgressed the law, it is his duty as a responsible Territorian to report that suspected transgression to the police and have it investigated. I do not condone in any way any Territorians taking the law into their own hands. The police certainly will not be acting in the very irresponsible way that I believe Mr Yunupingu acted. The law will be applied equally to all Territorians. I suggest ...
Members interjecting.
Madam SPEAKER: Order!
Mr REED: I am speaking on behalf of Territorians who have expressed concerns to me and to other members about the comments by Mr Yunupingu. This House has a responsibility to make it clear to all Territorians that, although they believe they are acting within their culture, they must also consider that they have to act within the law. The law will be applied equally to all Territorians. It is a great shame that members opposite cannot appreciate the need for that. If we departed from that process, which has been long established and long respected in this country, we would have civil unrest for which the opposition alone would be responsible, judging from the attitudes indicated in the interjections that they continue this morning.
Page 4
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016