The Premier is no better than previous LNP Premier Campbell Newman when he attacks Judges for cheap political gain in order to deal with the current law and order public stoush.
Read More
“The Premier’s suggestion that Magistrates’ behaviour should be changed when he full well knows it is his Government’s policy as reflected in Queensland’s Youth Justice Act that the law is as pronounced by Magistrate Power reflects the Premier’s weak and unprincipled repetitive attacks on Queensland’s Judiciary”, Mr O’Gorman said
Read More
The Parliament should also take the opportunity to remedy a big hole in the law in Queensland by providing a right to those who are wrongfully convicted of a criminal offence to claim compensation.
Read More
The important connection between a dog and their owner renders the destruction order a decision that should be a last resort and made with careful consideration. Destruction orders infringe upon the rights of the dog and the dog owner. However, the threat the dog poses to the community and the careful consideration that occurs for destruction orders renders such a decision appropriate and necessary to uphold community safety in the relevant circumstances.
Read More
Mr O’Gorman said there is clearly a problem with a cohort of juveniles committing car thefts and violent crime but attacking Judges and Magistrates who cannot defend themselves publicly is a cheap and easy political stunt.
Read More
This legislation was introduced in 2004 at the peak of concerns about terrorism. Since then, we have learned that the law inappropriately prioritizes the secrecy of national security information over the administration of justice
Read More
This broad definition of ‘information’ and over-classification of what amounts to ‘national security information’ has serious implications. Anything that could fall within these definitions could be withheld from the defendant (or, in civil proceedings, withheld from one party[1]), which relates to issues of due process discussed above. These broad definitions and scope of the Act increased the encroachment of the executive on due process and a right to a fair trial. As a result, the executive is given ‘enormous scope for unwarranted interference in the administration of justice’
Read More
The Collaery, McBride and Boyle cases have to be seen as part of a new trend whereby evidence is admitted into court and is available to one side (the prosecution, in criminal matters) but not to the other even though that evidence may be used against them. The circumstances in which this evidence is selectively admitted is much broader than the previous public interest immunity exception placed on national security. Much leeway is being granted to the Executive to exclude evidence from scrutiny
Read More
“To deprive the public and the Coroner of the best possible evidence namely the audio and video of SERT body worn cameras is unbelievable”, Mr O’Gorman said.
Read More
The Council finds it nonsense to suggest appointment based solely on merit by this process is possible. Nor does the Council think that the public is best served by continuing to portray the notion that there is an idealised standard for a Judge and there is always a clear front-runner for the role. The Council is certain that for any position there are a considerable number of choices who would be more than capable of performing the role well. Society’s main interest is that the appointee is one of those capable of performing the role well. To that end it must be beyond doubt that the appointment was neither arbitrary nor political. That is what it is at the moment.
Read More
A review of the discussion document indicates that the only research that has been undertaken to prepare it is into opinion polls. It is a document designed to pander to some of the worst prejudices in the community
Read More