This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/dec/06/nt-law-allowing-preemptive-detention-of-drunk-people-to-be-challenged-in-court
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| NT law allowing pre-emptive detention of drunk people to be challenged in court | |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| A law that allows police to pre-emptively lock up a drunk person who may cause harm or annoyance to others will be challenged in the high court on Tuesday. | A law that allows police to pre-emptively lock up a drunk person who may cause harm or annoyance to others will be challenged in the high court on Tuesday. |
| The Human Rights Law Centre and the North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency (Naaja) are taking the case to the country’s highest court to challenge the Northern Territory’s “broad” protective custody orders. | The Human Rights Law Centre and the North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency (Naaja) are taking the case to the country’s highest court to challenge the Northern Territory’s “broad” protective custody orders. |
| The laws allow NT police to detain a person for up to 10 hours if that person is drunk and unable to adequately care for themselves, and if police have a reasonable belief that they are likely to commit an offence or may harm, intimidate, alarm or cause substantial annoyance to others because they are drunk. | The laws allow NT police to detain a person for up to 10 hours if that person is drunk and unable to adequately care for themselves, and if police have a reasonable belief that they are likely to commit an offence or may harm, intimidate, alarm or cause substantial annoyance to others because they are drunk. |
| The legal groups argue the laws are too broad and are disproportionately used against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. | The legal groups argue the laws are too broad and are disproportionately used against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. |
| “The Northern Territory has some of the most punitive and overused protective custody laws in Australia,” said Naaja’s principal lawyer, David Woodroffe. “This case is about setting limits to make sure that the powers are more fairly and appropriately used.” | “The Northern Territory has some of the most punitive and overused protective custody laws in Australia,” said Naaja’s principal lawyer, David Woodroffe. “This case is about setting limits to make sure that the powers are more fairly and appropriately used.” |
| Last year the high court upheld the NT’s similarly controversial paperless arrest laws, which allow police to detain a person without charge for up to four hours. | Last year the high court upheld the NT’s similarly controversial paperless arrest laws, which allow police to detain a person without charge for up to four hours. |
| According to police data the protective custody law was used more than 20,700 times between August 2014 and July 2016, among a population of about 245,000 people. | According to police data the protective custody law was used more than 20,700 times between August 2014 and July 2016, among a population of about 245,000 people. |
| The law centre points to the rate of similar laws in Victoria (used about 8,000 times a year among a population of 6m) and says the NT’s powers are too broad. | The law centre points to the rate of similar laws in Victoria (used about 8,000 times a year among a population of 6m) and says the NT’s powers are too broad. |
| Between 2007 and 2015, 92% of people taken into protective custody were Indigenous. | Between 2007 and 2015, 92% of people taken into protective custody were Indigenous. |
| “There’s no other jurisdiction where someone can be taken into protective custody based on a reasonable assumption they might commit an offence,” Adrianne Walters, senior lawyer at the Human Rights Law Centre, told Guardian Australia. | “There’s no other jurisdiction where someone can be taken into protective custody based on a reasonable assumption they might commit an offence,” Adrianne Walters, senior lawyer at the Human Rights Law Centre, told Guardian Australia. |
| Walters said the case sought to test the legal threshold that needed to be satisfied before a police officer could detain a drunk person. | Walters said the case sought to test the legal threshold that needed to be satisfied before a police officer could detain a drunk person. |
| “It’s looking at the extent to which a police officer’s general prior experience and assumptions are relevant ... in contrast to their actual knowledge and observations of the person they want to detain.” | “It’s looking at the extent to which a police officer’s general prior experience and assumptions are relevant ... in contrast to their actual knowledge and observations of the person they want to detain.” |
| Tuesday’s case – an appeal from the NT court of appeal – is on behalf of Anthony Prior, an Indigenous man who was taken into protective custody in Darwin on New Year’s Eve in 2013 after being found drinking in a public place and who allegedly became abusive. | Tuesday’s case – an appeal from the NT court of appeal – is on behalf of Anthony Prior, an Indigenous man who was taken into protective custody in Darwin on New Year’s Eve in 2013 after being found drinking in a public place and who allegedly became abusive. |
| “In Mr Prior’s case the police didn’t know him at all before they approached him, they weren’t aware of any prior offending ... or incidents,” Walters said. | “In Mr Prior’s case the police didn’t know him at all before they approached him, they weren’t aware of any prior offending ... or incidents,” Walters said. |
| “Our argument is they relied too much on general policing experience and what one officer described as an educated assumption.” | “Our argument is they relied too much on general policing experience and what one officer described as an educated assumption.” |
| Walters said this assessment process, rather than focusing on the circumstances, could lead officers to stereotype people. The NT court of appeal noted officers acted on stereotyping to a certain degree in Prior’s arrest but their actions were lawful. | Walters said this assessment process, rather than focusing on the circumstances, could lead officers to stereotype people. The NT court of appeal noted officers acted on stereotyping to a certain degree in Prior’s arrest but their actions were lawful. |
| “It is a concern because it’s a power to deprive people of their liberty and Aboriginal people do die in custody,” she said. “Properly resourced alternatives, like sobering up shelters, are a far better and safer option. Problem drinking is best tackled through the health system, not the criminal justice system.” | “It is a concern because it’s a power to deprive people of their liberty and Aboriginal people do die in custody,” she said. “Properly resourced alternatives, like sobering up shelters, are a far better and safer option. Problem drinking is best tackled through the health system, not the criminal justice system.” |