15
WEDNESDAY, JULY 14, 1993
THE BILL PROPOSED TO ABOLISH THE POWER OF COURTS RECOGNIZANCES FROM BAIL PERSONS AS GUARANTEES FOR THEIR SURRENDER TO CUSTODY.
ΤΟ
TAKE
FUTURE
CUSTODY
INSTEAD, A SPECIFIC OFFENCE OF FAILING TO SURRENDER TO WAS PROPOSED. EXISTING POWERS FOR COURTS TO REQUIRE CASH DEPOSITS FROM DEFENDANTS, AND TO REQUIRE SURETIES, WERE RETAINED.
"IN ANY CASE WHERE A PERSON IS REFUSED UNCONDITIONAL BAIL BY A MAGISTRATE OR A DISTRICT COURT JUDGE, THE BILL PROVIDES THAT HE OR SHE WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPLY TO A HIGH COURT JUDGE WHO WILL CONSIDER THE MATTER AFRESH. THE BILL IN SUBSTANCE REPEATS THE EFFECT OF EXISTING LAW," MR MATHEWS SAID.
THE BILL PRESERVED EXISTING POWERS OF ARREST WITHOUT WARRANT BY A POLICE OFFICER WHERE THERE WERE REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE A PERSON HAD BREACHED OR WAS LIKELY TO BREACH HIS BAIL.
IT ALSO PRESERVED THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S RIGHT TO SEEK A REVIEW OF BAIL GRANTED BY A MAGISTRATE OR DISTRICT COURT JUDGE.
MR MATHEWS POINTED OUT THAT THE BILL ONLY SOUGHT ΤΟ REGULATE THE MANNER IN WHICH COURTS EXERCISED THEIR DISCRETION.
HE SAID FOR THE MOST PART, THE COURTS' JURISDICTION TO GRANT BAIL WAS NOT ALTERED, WITH ONLY ONE EXCEPTION.
THE BILL PROPOSED THAT THE COURT OF APPEAL SHOULD BE EMPOWERED ΤΟ GRANT BAIL OR DETAIN A PERSON IN CUSTODY PENDING A PROSECUTION DEFENCE APPEAL TO THE PRIVY COUNCIL.
AT PRESENT, THERE WAS NO SUCH POWER.
OR
MR MATHEWS SAID ALTHOUGH THE LAW REFORM COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED BOTH TO BAIL BY THE POLICE AND BAIL BY THE COURTS, THE BILL RELATED ONLY TO THE LATTER BECAUSE A FURTHER LAW REFORM COMMISSION REPORT ON ARREST, DETENTION, SEARCH AND SEIZURE, PUBLISHED IN NOVEMBER 1992, WAS UNDER ACTIVE CONSIDERATION.
THIS DEALT WITH POLICE POWERS GENERALLY AND THE QUESTION OF BAIL BY THE POLICE IS MORE APPROPRIATELY CONSIDERED IN THAT WIDER CONTEXT.
MR MATHEWS
STRESSED THE BILL WOULD BE BALANCING THE
THE NEED TO PROTECT
INDIVIDUAL'
'S RIGHT TO FREEDOM WITH,
AGAINST CRIMINALS.
DEBATE ON THE BILL WAS ADJOURNED.
SOCIETY
0
/16