Garrett David: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Garrett David: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:12709] 
DAVID GARRETT (ACT) 
: 
 I will begin not as my notes would have it but by taking up the Minister of Justice’s invitation. He mentioned that the advice he has received which he suspects that all of his predecessors received was to build more courthouses and to appoint more judges. Well I say to the Minister how about getting judges to work harder. In this country judges seem to work from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. 5 days a week. In other jurisdictions such as Singapore and the USA night courts and weekend courts are a common feature and for a very good reason. The old maxim of course that “justice delayed is justice denied” is extremely important and it goes back as far as the Magna Carta. In our view this Government should have a target of having all cases heard and decided within 1 year of charges being laid. 
That is not an impossible task at all. At the moment courthouses lie idle from 4 o’clock or 4:30 until 9 or 10 o’clock the next morning. That can easily change. The Minister will probably have some problems getting existing judges to work harder but there is no good reason with the queue of people wishing to be District Court judges that those who wish to be appointed could not be appointed on contracts that require them to work the night shift from time to time as the rest of society does. The delays that we have seen are unfair to victims and they are unfair to the accused. Victims have the right to have the cases of which they are central—and in my view victims are central not the State—resolved quickly. Likewise the accused have the right to their presumption of innocence and to have their trials brought as quickly as possible. 
There was one high-profile example just recently of how the system is not working. I am not a sports fan but I am told that the fellow Rene Ranger is a well-known rugby player. He was arrested on two charges of injuring with intent committed in August last year. His case may be heard in November 1 year after his arrest but the officer in charge of the case apparently says it is more likely to be further delayed until September or October next year which will be 2 years after his arrest. That is absurd. It is unjust; it would be comical if it were not so serious. 
As I said at the beginning other countries have night courts and weekend courts. Singapore has had night courts in place since 1992 for the express purpose of dealing with “the high volume of regulatory and traffic offences” that would otherwise block their courts thus delaying more serious cases being heard. That is exactly what is going on here. Many US states use night courts to deal with such issues as landlord and tenant disputes small claims and minor misdemeanours. People do not stop committing crimes of course because it is the weekend. 
More recently the Minister has introduced—with I think widespread support in the House—on-the-spot protection orders. Persons subjected to those orders have the right to have their cases heard as well. Night and weekend courts can play a key role there as they do in Alaska North Carolina and other places. 
Bail hearings are another issue. I found myself in the unique position a couple of weeks ago of agreeing with Mr Peter Williams QC that bail hearings are woefully slow in this country. Although it is true that less than 5 percent of people remanded in custody are found not guilty it is unjust to have that 5 percent on remand for more than a year awaiting trial. The sooner those arrested have bail hearings the more justice is not only done but seen to be done. I have witnessed firsthand in American states bail hearings that are always done the morning after arrest. Officials get through several hundred hearings in a couple of hours and there is no reason why we cannot do that too. If we adopt best practice from other countries—and indeed from the private sector as the Minister has touched on with the audiovisual link legislation which again had widespread support across the House—we can go a long way to unclogging our courts and fulfilling our constitutional obligations to both victims and accused alike. Thank you.