Mr ELFERINK - 2000-08-15
A relieving magistrate recently made some pretty emotional statements about government policy while sentencing a man who had menaced the community at Nyirripi. He was also critical of our legal system, as well as making comments about the good works of Correctional Services from the bench. Is the minister aware of the statement?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, the honourable member is obviously aware of the issues that have been commented on in the media. They are, in my view, very disturbing remarks. They were made by a magistrate in sentencing a person in the Alice Springs Court just last week. They concern me as a resident of the Northern Territory, as a representative in this House of the members of my constituency and, most importantly, they concern me as Minister for Police, because they impinge on all of those areas. They impinge on issues that extend right across the community.
For the benefit of honourable members, I will give some background to the matter. On 2 August this year, police were called to Nyirripi after receiving a report of a disturbance involving a man with a rifle. Police attended to find the man had discarded the rifle and armed himself with a nulla-nulla. The man pursued one of the two officers. The officer felt threatened and unclipped his firearm, but was unable to draw it because he did not have a safe arc of fire due to people behind the offender. The offender then swung the nulla-nulla at the officer. Fortuitously, the blow brushed off the back of his vest. The offender then raised the nulla-nulla again, causing the officer to fear for his life. I remind honourable members that a nulla-nulla, among its many uses, is a killing stick.
At this point, his fellow officer drove the police vehicle at the offender, who took evasive action. This was done twice, with the offender avoiding each time. The offender then picked up a firestick and ran at the police vehicle as it drove away. The offender then damaged a vehicle and armed himself with an axe. He was eventually taken into custody.
This was pretty nasty stuff! In your mind’s eye, put yourself in the position of members of the community, and more particularly on the frontline with the police officers.
Before we see what happened when the matter went to court, let us look at the person’s record, which dates back to 1994 and extends to four pages. It includes a series of convictions for traffic offences and convictions for being armed with an offensive weapon; assault a member of the police force, criminal damage and aggravated assault, resisting arrest and going armed in public. The first conviction, in 1994, was for criminal damage. That, I think, clearly demonstrates to members the seriousness of the circumstance with which we are dealing.
The matter was heard by a relieving magistrate. In sentencing this offender he began his remarks by saying, ‘Under a good legal system …’, with the clear inference that in the Northern Territory we do not have a good legal system. I find that offensive. Mind you, if the Attorney-General were to make remarks of this kind it is a different thing. But I think it is an alarming comment for a magistrate to make.
The relieving magistrate in sentencing this offender said that under a good legal system, the offender would be able to receive help for his alcohol problems while in jail. I quote:
But the government does not seem to be willing to spend money for that to happen and to help people like you.
Now that in itself is alarming, because it ignores the fact that Correctional Services do have programs in place. They do have work programs, they have rehabilitation programs and they have activities that can be pursued within the jail system that are to the benefit of the person so incarcerated.
The magistrate followed that comment with:
They just want to treat you like a criminal, without seeing you as a human being with problems.
That is the real issue that I take up on behalf of police officers, particularly those officers who had to confront this person, who had their lives at risk. We in this House expect police to continually do that in protecting the community. Such comments made from the bench in relation to the sentencing of a person so charged and having so threatened police officers and, indeed, threatened the community is nothing short of alarming.
I am fully aware of the separation of powers, but the separation of powers works two ways. The opposition spokesman for police laughs. He has a grin from ear to ear. That demonstrates another serious question in relation to how you treat these matters. On a very important and serious issue like this, the opposition spokesman for police laughs. What an indictment on your integrity!
The separation of powers works both ways. The community expects the courts to apply the law, not to interpret it with their own personal annotations. It is not easy to make remarks in this regard to the courts. I appeal to the magistracy to recognise that the community has expectations that are often quite different to their personal views. They expect the law to be applied, and not some personal interpretation of the circumstances as occurred here.
In my book, in my vocabulary, for this particular person I do not have a word other than ‘criminal’. What else could you call a person with the criminal record that he has and the way that he acted on this occasion? I ask the members opposite to consider that. I ask you to consider the serious and very threatened circumstances the police find themselves in from time to time, and I ask you to respond in a way other than laughing at those circumstances and to consider that these comments from the bench are not productive.
I call upon the magistracy to take full account of the dangers the police face. We expect them, notwithstanding that they have been through experiences as terrifying as these would have been, to go out tomorrow and do the very same thing. I think that needs a better interpretation from the courts.
And your best response is ‘sit down’! Well, that demonstrates your level of concern and your understanding of important matters. That comment, ‘sit down’, together with the opposition police spokesman’s response of laughing, clearly demonstrates the attitude that would be adopted by the Labor Party if they were in government.
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, the honourable member is obviously aware of the issues that have been commented on in the media. They are, in my view, very disturbing remarks. They were made by a magistrate in sentencing a person in the Alice Springs Court just last week. They concern me as a resident of the Northern Territory, as a representative in this House of the members of my constituency and, most importantly, they concern me as Minister for Police, because they impinge on all of those areas. They impinge on issues that extend right across the community.
For the benefit of honourable members, I will give some background to the matter. On 2 August this year, police were called to Nyirripi after receiving a report of a disturbance involving a man with a rifle. Police attended to find the man had discarded the rifle and armed himself with a nulla-nulla. The man pursued one of the two officers. The officer felt threatened and unclipped his firearm, but was unable to draw it because he did not have a safe arc of fire due to people behind the offender. The offender then swung the nulla-nulla at the officer. Fortuitously, the blow brushed off the back of his vest. The offender then raised the nulla-nulla again, causing the officer to fear for his life. I remind honourable members that a nulla-nulla, among its many uses, is a killing stick.
At this point, his fellow officer drove the police vehicle at the offender, who took evasive action. This was done twice, with the offender avoiding each time. The offender then picked up a firestick and ran at the police vehicle as it drove away. The offender then damaged a vehicle and armed himself with an axe. He was eventually taken into custody.
This was pretty nasty stuff! In your mind’s eye, put yourself in the position of members of the community, and more particularly on the frontline with the police officers.
Before we see what happened when the matter went to court, let us look at the person’s record, which dates back to 1994 and extends to four pages. It includes a series of convictions for traffic offences and convictions for being armed with an offensive weapon; assault a member of the police force, criminal damage and aggravated assault, resisting arrest and going armed in public. The first conviction, in 1994, was for criminal damage. That, I think, clearly demonstrates to members the seriousness of the circumstance with which we are dealing.
The matter was heard by a relieving magistrate. In sentencing this offender he began his remarks by saying, ‘Under a good legal system …’, with the clear inference that in the Northern Territory we do not have a good legal system. I find that offensive. Mind you, if the Attorney-General were to make remarks of this kind it is a different thing. But I think it is an alarming comment for a magistrate to make.
The relieving magistrate in sentencing this offender said that under a good legal system, the offender would be able to receive help for his alcohol problems while in jail. I quote:
But the government does not seem to be willing to spend money for that to happen and to help people like you.
Now that in itself is alarming, because it ignores the fact that Correctional Services do have programs in place. They do have work programs, they have rehabilitation programs and they have activities that can be pursued within the jail system that are to the benefit of the person so incarcerated.
The magistrate followed that comment with:
They just want to treat you like a criminal, without seeing you as a human being with problems.
That is the real issue that I take up on behalf of police officers, particularly those officers who had to confront this person, who had their lives at risk. We in this House expect police to continually do that in protecting the community. Such comments made from the bench in relation to the sentencing of a person so charged and having so threatened police officers and, indeed, threatened the community is nothing short of alarming.
I am fully aware of the separation of powers, but the separation of powers works two ways. The opposition spokesman for police laughs. He has a grin from ear to ear. That demonstrates another serious question in relation to how you treat these matters. On a very important and serious issue like this, the opposition spokesman for police laughs. What an indictment on your integrity!
The separation of powers works both ways. The community expects the courts to apply the law, not to interpret it with their own personal annotations. It is not easy to make remarks in this regard to the courts. I appeal to the magistracy to recognise that the community has expectations that are often quite different to their personal views. They expect the law to be applied, and not some personal interpretation of the circumstances as occurred here.
In my book, in my vocabulary, for this particular person I do not have a word other than ‘criminal’. What else could you call a person with the criminal record that he has and the way that he acted on this occasion? I ask the members opposite to consider that. I ask you to consider the serious and very threatened circumstances the police find themselves in from time to time, and I ask you to respond in a way other than laughing at those circumstances and to consider that these comments from the bench are not productive.
I call upon the magistracy to take full account of the dangers the police face. We expect them, notwithstanding that they have been through experiences as terrifying as these would have been, to go out tomorrow and do the very same thing. I think that needs a better interpretation from the courts.
And your best response is ‘sit down’! Well, that demonstrates your level of concern and your understanding of important matters. That comment, ‘sit down’, together with the opposition police spokesman’s response of laughing, clearly demonstrates the attitude that would be adopted by the Labor Party if they were in government.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016