Chapter
2 - Parliamentary Privilege: immunities and powers of the Senate
Parliamentary precincts
Section 15 of the
1987 Act declares, for the avoidance of doubt, that, subject to the law
relating to parliamentary powers and immunities, a law in force in the Australian
Capital Territory applies in the parliamentary precincts according to its
tenor.
The Parliamentary Precincts Act 1988 defines the parliamentary
precincts, provides that the Presiding
Officers have management and control of the precincts, and makes other
provisions for the administration of the precincts.
For many years before these two Acts were passed discussion of
parliamentary privilege was bedevilled by confusion of questions relating to
the immunities of the Houses, their committees and members with questions
relating to the parliamentary precincts. There is no connection between the
precincts of Parliament, however defined, and the ordinary law or the law
relating to parliamentary immunities. Many people were confused into thinking
that there was some such connection; in particular, there was a persistent idea
that the ordinary law did not apply in the precincts.
There was never any ground for doubt that the ordinary criminal law
applied in the parliamentary precincts, however defined, as it applies anywhere
else in the jurisdiction: Rees v McCay 1975 26 FLR 228,
and the authorities referred to in that case.
Words or acts which might otherwise constitute criminal offences are
immune from prosecution if they are said or done in the course of proceedings
in Parliament. This, however, has
nothing to do with the parliamentary precincts. The immunity adheres to words
spoken or acts done outside the precincts, for example, words spoken in the
proceedings of a committee sitting anywhere in the country, or an assault
committed by an officer of either House while carrying out a lawful order of
that House for the arrest of a person anywhere in the country.
The issue was further confused by the fact that it is an essential
element of some criminal acts that they be done in a public place; that is,
such acts are offences only if they are committed in a public place. There was
some doubt about whether the courts regarded any part of Parliament House as a
public place. Again, this had nothing to do with the precincts, although the
courts might have regard to the question of what are the precincts in
determining whether a particular act was done in a public place. Most criminal
offences do not depend for their status as offences upon their being done in a
public place.
It was an element of some contempts of Parliament that they were done
in the parliamentary precincts; that is, the acts concerned were contempts only
if they were done in the precincts. For example, it was long held to be a
contempt for any authority to attempt to execute any criminal or civil process
in the parliamentary precincts on a sitting day. The powers of the Houses to
deal with contempts do not, however, depend upon any declaration of the
precincts.
Thus the declaration of what are the parliamentary precincts is an
administrative matter, which has no connection with the operation of either the
ordinary law or the law of parliamentary immunities.
The whole matter was therefore cleared up and placed beyond doubt by
the 1987 and 1988 legislation.
Previous Page | Contents | Next Page
Website feedback: web.senate@aph.gov.au
Last reviewed 2 February 2010 by the Senate Web Administrator
© Commonwealth of Australia
Parliament of Australia Web Site Privacy Statement
Images courtesy of AUSPIC
|
