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

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Thursday, 12 December 2002
Page: 7858


Senator ELLISON (Minister for Justice and Customs) (11:54 AM) —Just to make sure that I have got this right, I think Senator Harris is saying that proposed section 34E(1) states what must be explained in the first instance when the person is brought before the prescribed authority. Of course, when the warrant is renewed—that is, when the period of detention is extended—on a rolling basis at the commencement of each new period, the person will have it again explained to them that they may seek from the Federal Court a remedy relating to the warrant or the treatment of the person.

I think Senator Harris is asking: do these two proposed subsections operate in isolation of each other or are they are linked? As I understand it, in relation to the first advice— that is, at the initial appearance—there is an inclusion of reference to a Federal Court judge. When the warrant is extended, again the person is told—and on each occasion of an extension the person is told—that they have this avenue of action to a Federal Court judge. So the person will get the big explanation at the beginning and then, at subsequent extensions, they will get the further reminder that they are entitled to go to a Federal Court judge if they feel aggrieved. I think that explains it.