Double Jeopardy and Federal Law

Attorneys-General fail to reach agreement on double jeopardy reform

Norfolk Island (Thursday, 18 March 2004): The Attorneys-General of Australia failed to reach complete agreement on how to proceed with double jeopardy reform at their meeting on Norfolk Island this week. They only agreed that further work should be done by the Model Criminal Code Officers' Committee (MCCOC) on the "tainted acquittal" proposal.

A "tainted acquittal" is where the acquitted person has been proven to have knowingly procured his or her own acquittal by bribing a juror or witness.

Only New South Wales, the Commonwealth and Western Australia supported the introduction of another proposal: the retrial of acquitted persons when "fresh & compelling" evidence is found after the acquittal.

Interestingly, the Federal Attorney-General's press release mentioned that such retrials would only be available for a restricted set of offences: murder, manslaughter, serious drug offences, aggravated rape and armed robbery. This suggests that the original model has been abandoned. Originally, all crimes attracting 15 years or more imprisonment would have been at risk of retrial.

The Attorneys-General meet next in July 2004 and are expected to discuss the introduction of a national approach to tainted acquittals.

Read the federal Attorney-General's media release.

Read why Victoria and Queensland decided not to join the push for double jeopardy reform.

Read the Model Criminal Code Officers Committee interim report, which outrageously:

• ignores the weight of criticism against its proposals
• ignores the principled opposition of the NSW DPP to its proposals, and
• recommends the unconstitutional retrospective operation of its proposals.

Federal Government releases Double Jeopardy Discussion Paper

Canberra (Friday, 21 November 2003): The Attorneys-General of Australia released a discussion paper on double jeopardy reform in Hobart this week. The discussion paper was written by the Model Criminal Code Officers Committee and examines three main 'protective principles':

• prosecution for an administration of justice offence connected to the original trial (like perjury);
• a retrial of the original or similar offence where fresh evidence arises; and,
• a retrail of the original or similar offence if the acquittal is tainted.

You can read the full discussion paper on the Federal Attorney-General's website.

You can read CCL's response to the discussion paper.

Read the Minister for Justice's media release (14 November 2003).

What YOU can do

The Model Criminal Code Officers Committee has called for public comment on their discussion paper. Deadline for submissions is 31 January 2004.

If you want to protect double jeopardy, you should write to the inquiry. Your submission need be no more than a few lines explaining why you think the rule against double jeopardy should be preserved. You should also talk to or email your local member of the House of Representatives or the Senate to register your opinions.

Other information

Click here to read what's happening in New South Wales

Click here for more general information about double jeopardy