XN000022-1995-07-19 — Page 70

45

+

Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Bill 1995 and Evidence (Amendment) Bill 1995

Following is the speech by the Attorney General, the Hon Jeremy Mathews, in the second reading debate of the Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Bill 1995 and Evidence (Amendment) Bill 1995 in the Legislative Council today (Wednesday):

Mr President,

I am grateful to the Honourable Ronald Arculli and Members of the Bills Committee for their thorough and careful consideration of these important Bills. I would also like to thank the Bar Association for their substantial contribution to improving these Bills.

Mr Arculli has described the more significant amendments which have been agreed with the Bills Committee. I will be moving these and a number of other technical amendments at the Committee Stage.

I would like to respond to a number of points that have been raised in the debate this morning.

First, Mr Arculli noted that the Bills Committee had suggested that the Administration should ensure by administrative measures that, at the time of giving evidence by way of live television link, neither the prosecution nor the defence should exert any influence on the evidence being given. I can assure Members that the Administration is fully alive to this issue and will take all appropriate steps to ensure that evidence is given without any influence at all.

Secondly, I would like to say something about the proposed notice of transfer procedure. The proposed Section 79F seeks to prevent child or mentally handicapped witnesses from being required to give evidence in court twice - once at the committal proceedings and again at the trial. The Crown Prosecutor can dispense with the committal proceedings by issuing a "Notice of Transfer", certifying that the evidence is sufficient for the defendant to be committed for trial, and that to avoid any prejudice to the welfare of the witness, the case be taken over by the High Court without delay. The provision is, as presently drawn, similar to that contained in Section 53 of the English Criminal Justice Act 1991 and to Section 3 of their own Complex Commercial Crimes Ordinance. As a safeguard against any possible injustice, the defendant has the right to apply to the High Court to be discharged under the proposed Section 79G(2) and such a discharge will be deemed to be an acquittal by virtue of Section 79G(7).

Page 70Page 71