Finlayson ChristopherEVIDENCE AMENDMENT BILLThird ReadingHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) on behalf of the Minister of Justice: I move That the Evidence Amendment Bill be now read a third time. At its core this bill is going to reduce unnecessary trauma and better protect victims who become involved in the court processes through no fault of their own. Being a victim of sexual violence or a child witness who is called to give evidence can obviously be a truly harrowing experience but often these testimonies are critical for the case. The changes in this bill are a major step in delivering on the Government's aim to improve the experience of child witnesses and victims of sexual violence in the courtroom. So it is absolutely essential that the rules of evidence are kept clear up to date and working as intended to try to address this sort of issue. A well-drafted and up-to-date Evidence Act is vital to a well-functioning and fair justice system. As required by section 202 of the Evidence Act the Law Commission undertook a periodic review of the legislation in 2013 and found that it was generally working very well. In my opinion that is not surprising given the excellent work done by Parliament way back in 2006 when the original legislation was introduced—and I refer particularly to the subcommittee of the Justice and Electoral Committee which was chaired by Russell Fairbrother then a Labour MP; and assisted by Richard Worth Nandor Tanczos and me. We had the assistance of Robert Fisher an Auckland Queen's Counsel who acted as special adviser. I think the legislation was very good when it was passed in 2006 but one of the ideas was to have a periodic review. So this is what the Law Commission did and it recommended a number of technical changes and the bill progresses all but one. The bill includes three core changes: to improve the court process for child witnesses to enhance the court process for complainants in sexual offence cases and to introduce important safeguards for video record evidence. So let me look at each of those issues—first child witnesses. Last year around 450 child witnesses gave evidence in criminal court cases with a large proportion being complainants in sex abuse cases. The changes we are making will help those witnesses. Giving evidence is a very tough experience no matter what the circumstances but for children it is especially traumatic. We know that most children especially those who are very young are already giving evidence in alternative ways so the bill creates a presumption that child witnesses give evidence through the video of their police interview via a closed-circuit television or from behind a screen. Generally a legislative presumption will ensure the alternatives are used consistently all across our courts for those witnesses under the age of 18 years. Encouraging these alternatives will help to shield child witnesses from the more intimidating aspects of the evidence-gathering process like facing the defendant in the public gallery. Another of the bill's measures to protect child witnesses is the automatic entitlement to have a support person with them when they are giving evidence. Judges will oversee this entitlement to avoid obviously any risk of improper influence being exerted by the nominated support person. So hopefully these changes are going to improve the court process for child witnesses and reduce that trauma. We also know that when children are less stressed their evidence tends to be more accurate so these changes will have flow-on benefits for the justice system as a whole. The second topic is the issue of sexual offence cases and the second part of the bill is about allowing sexual violence complainants to be better prepared for questioning. Concerns have been raised about the fact that in criminal trials for sexual offences the victim is effectively put on trial when evidence is called about their sexual history. It is insulting and it is offensive to suggest that any assault was less of an offence because of the number of partners for example a woman had or anything else in her sexual history. So we are introducing a requirement that the defence gives notice before a trial begins if they intend to introduce evidence along those lines with a person other than the defendant. Currently permission to introduce this evidence can be sought at any time during a trial. Admissibility of the evidence would be determined before the trial which not only allows the trial to proceed uninterrupted but also gives the victim time to come to terms with what is going to be discussed in court. We need to make what is an inherently stressful process as undemanding as possible for victims and a part of that is to ensure complainants can be prepared for what is going to happen during the trial. The third issue involves the introduction of safeguards. The bill places restrictions and safeguards on defence counsel access to these video records in sexual and violent cases and in all cases involving the child witness. It is never going to be easy for a victim of a sexual crime to come forward and make a complaint and then relive their painful experiences in a courtroom facing the judge the jury legal counsel often the media and the person who is alleged to have offended against them. In cases like these police interviews with vulnerable witnesses are often recorded and used at the trial as the witness's evidence in chief. The bill places some additional restrictions on how these videos can be dealt with to ensure they do not end up in the wrong hands or the wrong place. These amendments mean that the defence will no longer have an automatic right to a copy of the video. However fair trial rights are preserved by the bill. The defence will still have the ability to view the video evidence and to apply to the court for a copy. In the digital age it is critical that we ensure these legal protections are preserved. The bill also introduces offences and penalties for improper dealing with video record evidence. Under these changes it will be an offence to possess copy or supply video records outside what is prescribed in the Act or in regulations. The maximum penalties for improper use will range from a significant fine to 6 months' imprisonment. So hopefully these changes will support witnesses in sexual violence cases and all child complainants. Finally I want to say something about other work that is under way because this bill will complement the other initiatives already under way to provide better support to victims of crime. These include allowing victims of family violence to give evidence via a video record made by the police on their iPhone at the scene as often happens now; the strengthening safety service which has helped 2600 victims of family violence and their families since it was introduced in October 2014; and the Integrated Safety Response pilot in Christchurch which brings together a range of agencies and aims to ensure that families experiencing family violence are safe and receive the services they need to prevent further harm. The Minister is also considering the Law Commission's recommendations to improve the court experience of victims of sexual violence. So there is a lot of work in this area. In closing I want to thank the Law Commission the Justice and Electoral Committee and those who made submissions on this very important topic. I commend the bill to the House.