Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard   

Previous Fragment    
Thursday, 14 May 1987
Page: 3292

(Question No. 5042)


Mr Jacobi asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 17 February 1987:

Is it an anachronism, as stated by the Director of Public Prosecutions in his annual report for 1985-86, that a person charged with an offence against federal law can bring proceedings before a court in one State in order to prevent or delay being brought before the court of another State which, under the Constitution, is the proper court to deal with the charges; if so, will he amend the Service and Execution of Process Act to provide that the function of the court in the State where an offender is arrested should be limited to ensuring that the arrest warrant has been properly issued and enforced.


Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:

Part III of the Service and Execution of Process Act 1901 makes provision for interstate execution of warrants. Where a person is apprehended in one State under a warrant issued and endorsed in another State, and a Magistrate orders the person to be returned to the State in which the original warrant was issued, it is open to that person to seek review of the Magistrate's order in the Supreme Court.

The operation of the Service and Execution of Process Act 1901 is the subject of a reference to the Law Reform Commission. The issue referred to by the Honourable Member has been raised by the Director of Public Prosecutions with the Law Reform Commission in that context. Consideration will be given to the Director's remarks in the course of the Government's examination of the Law Reform Commission's report. That report is expected to be finalised soon.