Criminal Code (Consent and Mistake of Fact) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2020

We submitted that the law should reflect the proposition that in determining whether or not an accused’s belief that a person was consenting was reasonable, the jury should be able to take into account whether the accused was aware of circumstances which would lead a reasonable person to inquire further into the issue of consent. So that if the circumstances known to the accused were such that a reasonable person would not or might not take further steps to ascertain consent, then the accused will not be required to take any further steps either.

Read More
COVID-19 & Automatic Number Plate Recognition - More Mass Surveillance

The QCCL has written to the Commissioner of Police asking for comment in relation to reports that police are using ANPR (Automated Number Plate Recognition Technology) to charge people with breaching the Home Confinement Direction by travelling more than 50km from their home.

Read More
Councils for Civil Liberties' Joint Statement on COVID-Safe Bill

The NSW, Queensland and South Australian Councils for Civil Liberties support the introduction of effective digital contact tracing if it has robust privacy and transparency legislation underpinning it. There are however outstanding issues the Government should address before this Bill is passed.

Read More
Consent and the excuse of mistake of fact in sexual assault cases review

There is a difference between how our Criminal Code deals with the defence of mistake and how the Common Law deals with it. At common-law, a person will succeed in a defence of mistake of fact, if they held the belief in the mistaken fact honestly. However, under the Queensland Criminal Code the mistake of fact defence can only succeed when a person not only honestly has made a mistake, but their belief is reasonable.

Once again, public commentary on this issue seems to ignore the fact that Queensland law already provides for a mixture of subjective and objective factors in assessing whether or not the accused has made a mistake of fact. In particular, in our review of the law we found no support for the view that “reckless indifference” would ever be consistent with the reasonableness requirement in the Criminal Code

Read More
RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION BILL AND RELATED LEGISLATION -SECOND DRAFT

We can accept that there is a case, as there is in relation to churches, that such spaces are kept exclusively for the believers. Though it is our view, that the draft bill needs to be amended to make it clear that it is restricted to facilities dedicated to such spiritual purposes. Again, it is our position, that should the religious body make these facilities available on a commercial basis, they lose the right to avail selves of this exception. We also make the comment, that it is not clear to us why this is not covered by clause 36.

Read More
RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION BILL AND RELATED LEGISLATION

Religious worship is essential to most people's lives. This is true for non-believers as well as believers once we recognise that freedom of religious worship includes the freedom not to worship.

Once we accept that proposition the only generally acceptable basis for freedom of worship is equal freedom for everybody. Each person when considering their own claim to be able to worship freely, would reject a proposal that gave them less freedom to do so then another person.

Religious belief is primarily a matter of individual conscience. However, freedom of religion also encompasses the freedom to manifest one’s belief in community with others and in public. This is because witness in words and deeds is bound up with the existence of religious convictions.

Read More