Queensland Bills Explanatory Notes Queensland Bills Explanatory Notes[Index] [Search] [Download] [Bill] [Help]
Crime and Misconduct and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009
Crime and Misconduct and Summary
Offences Amendment Bill 2009
Explanatory Notes
Objectives of the Bill
The primary objective of the Bill is to make amendments to the following
two Acts -
· The Crime and Misconduct Commission Act 2001 to validate past,
present and future use of general `umbrella' referrals for major crime
investigations and subject general referrals to periodic review to ensure
they remain appropriate over time; and
· The Summary Offences Act 2005 to insert a specific offence applying to
rock throwing and other specified conduct which endangers or is
likely to endanger the safe use of vehicles.
Reasons for the Bill
Amendments to the Crime and Misconduct Commission Act 2001
(CMC Act)
Performance of the Crime and Misconduct Commission's major crime
function
The Crime and Misconduct Commission (CMC) investigates major crime
(organised crime, paedophilia, terrorism and criminal activity involving an
offence punishable not less than 14 years imprisonment) referred to it
under Chapter 2, Part 2, Division 2 of the CMC Act by an independent
body known as the Crime Reference Committee (CRC).
Through this mechanism, the CMC is authorised to exercise its
investigative powers, including those not ordinarily available to the police
service (e.g. powers of compulsion which abrogate the privilege against
self-incrimination), to investigate major crime. The CRC's oversight role
is reflected in its power to issue directions to the CMC about a crime
investigation (including placing limitations on the exercise of the CMC's
powers or directing the CMC to end a particular crime investigation) and to
Page 1
Crime and Misconduct and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009
obtain information from the CMC Assistant Commissioner, Crime about
the CMC's operations in relation to major crime.
This mechanism effectively replicated the crime referral arrangement
between the former QCC and the former QCCMC under the repealed
Crime Commission Act 1997 (the repealed Act). References made by the
QCCMC to the QCC under the repealed Act were continued as referrals of
major crime to the CMC by the CRC under the current Act (CMC Act,
section 355).
Both the former QCC and the CMC have operated under two types of
crime referrals:
(a) specific `stand alone' referrals that specify the particular activity
being investigated and/or persons suspected of being involved in that
criminal activity; and
(b) general `umbrella' referrals that broadly describe the major crime
activity to be investigated without having to specify individuals,
groups or events. In this regard, the CMC has had an administrative
procedure by which an internal CMC committee assesses whether a
particular investigation falls within the scope of an existing umbrella
referral or whether it should be referred to the CRC for a specific
referral to the CMC.
Nearly 80% of crime investigations undertaken by the former QCC and the
CMC have been conducted under umbrella referrals which relate to major
crime activities that are not conducive to the easy identification of
participants or specific incidents. These include referrals in respect of
established criminal networks (`Freshnet'), money laundering
(`Gatekeeper'), outlaw motorcycle gangs (`Hydra'), terrorism,
internet-based criminal paedophilia (`Atrax') and networked and/or
recidivist child sex offenders (`Artemis').
The impact of Scott v Witness C (2009) QSC 35
On 4 March 2009, Jones J delivered his judgment in Scott v Witness C
(2009) QSC 35 holding that an umbrella reference known as `Freshnet'
was not a valid referral for a specific major crime investigation and
consequently, the CMC's investigative powers had not been validly invoked
in that instance.
Witness C had been identified as a person likely to disclose information
under compulsion about a large scale organised crime syndicate involving
the trafficking of drugs between Victoria and Far North Queensland. The
Page 2
Crime and Misconduct and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009
CMC commenced an investigation (`Operation Destiny') and authorised
hearings under an umbrella reference known as `Freshnet', made in 1998
by the former QCCMC at the request of the former Crime Commissioner.
The Freshnet reference permitted the QCC to investigate criminal activity
that may involve trafficking, supply and dealing in dangerous drugs, money
laundering, violence, extortion, theft, fraud, forgery or interference with the
administration of justice by established criminal networks. The CMC
applied to the Supreme Court to have Witness C punished for contempt for
refusing to answer questions at the CMC hearing. The respondent
submitted that there could be no contempt because the hearing was not
authorised by a valid referral under the CMC
Jones J held that the Freshnet reference was not a valid referral under
section 46 of the repealed Act because it did not identify any particular
circumstances by which the QCCMC could have considered the threshold
matters specified in section 46 (since replicated in section 28 of the CMC
Act). His Honour held that the CMC could not rely upon the Freshnet
reference for its Operation Destiny investigation.
In the absence of a referral from the CRC or power for the CMC to launch
crime investigations on its own initiative, his Honour held that the CMC's
investigative powers were not validly exercised in this instance. He found
there was no contempt because the hearing was not part of an investigation
the CMC was authorised to undertake.
The Scott decision is considered to have the effect of limiting the CMC's
major crime function to investigating specific matters referred to it by the
CRC.
Giving effect to the intended operation of the crime referral mechanism
The Scott decision highlights concerns that the drafting of the referral
provisions under both the repealed Act and the CMC Act circumvents
Parliament's original intention that the crime function of the former
QCC/CMC should be subject to independent scrutiny by the former
QCCMC/CRC, which could use both specific and general referral
mechanisms.
Parliament's original intention is evinced in transcript of parliamentary
debate on the Crime Commission Bill 1997 and the Crime and Misconduct
Bill 2001. In these debates, it was noted that the CRC would still have
power to make broad `standing' references to make classes of major crime
Page 3
Crime and Misconduct and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009
(as opposed to particularised incidents) a constant issue for ongoing
monitoring and investigation by the CMC.
In Scott v Witness C, the court was concerned that use of the Freshnet
reference circumvented Parliament's intention that the exercise of the
CMC's investigative powers should be subject to independent scrutiny by
the CRC. Although the drafting of section 46 of the repealed Act and
section 28 of the CMC Act is somewhat unclear in this regard, it is evident
from the second reading debates of both Bills that the performance of the
Commission's crime function was subject to the CRC/former QCCMC
being satisfied that the exercise of exceptional investigative powers was in
the public interest.
Further, the Explanatory Notes for both the Crime Commission Bill 1997
and the Crime and Misconduct Commission Bill 2001 emphasise the
establishment and enhancement of strict accountability mechanisms to
control the use of the Commission's exceptional powers (including the role
of the relevant reference committee) and neither indicate an intention that a
referral request from the former Crime Commissioner/Assistant
Commissioner, Crime was not to be subject to public interest
considerations by the relevant reference committee.
Consequently amendments are required to remedy the impact of the Scott
decision and to give effect to the intended operation of the crime referral
mechanism.
Amendments to the Summary Offences Act 2005
Recent media coverage has highlighted the community's concern about the
potential danger of rocks and other objects being thrown at travelling
vehicles or onto roads.
Queensland has a suite of criminal offences which could apply to `rock
throwing' conduct, depending on the circumstances of the case. These
offences include: endangering the safe use of a vehicle or related transport
infrastructure (section 467); endangering the safety of a person in a vehicle
with intent (section 319); wilful damage (section 469); acts intended to
cause grievous bodily harm or other malicious acts (section 317); grievous
bodily harm (section 320); or, if death results, murder or manslaughter.
The maximum penalties for these offences range from 5 years
imprisonment to mandatory life imprisonment.
Page 4
Crime and Misconduct and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009
For example, if property damage, such as a shattered windscreen, results
from the `rock throwing' conduct, police could charge wilful damage,
which is punishable by a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment.
However the offences described above only apply where personal injury or
property damage occurs or where there is proof of malicious intent.
Given growing community concern about this conduct, the government
considers it necessary to develop a specific offence directed at `rock
throwing' and other dangerous conduct, such as directing a laser pointer at
a vehicle, which will complement the existing suite of offences described
above. The proposed offence is not reliant on proof of intent and can apply
where there is no personal injury or property damage or where the conduct
does not result in any actual endangerment.
Achievement of the Objectives
The Bill remedies the impact of the Scott decision and gives effect to the
intended operation of the crime referral mechanism by amending the CMC
Act to:
(a) generalise the reference to `particular cases of major crime' in section
5(2);
(b) reframe the crime referral provisions to deal expressly with specific
referrals (which identify the particular incident being investigated
and/or persons suspected of being involved in that incident) and
general referrals (which broadly describe the general nature of major
crime activity to be investigated without needing to identify
individuals or groups or particular incidents);
(c) clarify that a referral may relate to any circumstances implying or any
allegations that criminal activity referenced in the current definition of
`major crime' may have been, may be being, or may in the future be
committed;
(d) clarify that the public interest considerations under section 28 apply to
all referrals, whether requested by the Police Commissioner or the
Assistant Commissioner, Crime or initiated by the CRC;
(e) require the Assistant Commissioner, Crime, to notify the CRC as soon
as practicable when a particular investigation is commenced under an
existing general referral; and
Page 5
Crime and Misconduct and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009
(f) require the CRC, in respect of a notification given by the Assistant
Commissioner, Crime, that an investigation has commenced under an
existing general referral, to consider as soon as practicable, whether
directions are required in respect of that particular investigation (e.g.
to limit the exercise of the CMC's powers in that instance) under
section 29;
(g) subject general referrals to periodic review by the CRC to ensure they
remain appropriate over time ; and
(h) retrospectively validate:
(i) `umbrella' referrals made by the former QCCMC and the current
CRC prior to commencement;
(ii) crime investigations conducted under these umbrella referrals;
and
(iii) the use of information and evidence obtained by a crime
investigation conducted under these umbrella referrals by the
former QCC or the CMC for the performance of any QCC or
CMC function or the performance of a function of a law
enforcement agency or prosecuting authority to which the QCC
or CMC has provided the information or evidence.
The Bill also amends the Summary Offences Act 2005 to insert an offence
which applies to a person who unlawfully: throws an object at a vehicle
that is in the course of travelling; places an object in or near to the path a
vehicle is using or may use in the course of travelling; or directs a beam of
light from a laser at or near a vehicle that is in the course of travelling, in a
way that endangers or is likely to endanger the safe use of the vehicle. The
maximum penalty for this offence is 2 years imprisonment.
Estimated Cost for Government Implementation
The amendments do not impose any additional obligations on Government
agencies that cannot be met from existing appropriations.
Consistency with Fundamental Legislative Principles
The Bill raises fundamental legislative principle issues.
The amendments to the CMC Act validate the past use of umbrella referrals
made by the CRC and the former QCCMC; investigations conducted by the
CMC and the former QCC under these referrals and the use of any
Page 6
Crime and Misconduct and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009
information or evidence obtained by these investigations for the
performance of a function of the former QCC, CMC or other law
enforcement agency or prosecuting authority that has been given the
information or evidence by the QCC or CMC.
The validation may be considered to retrospectively affect the rights and
liberties of individuals (section 4(3)(g), Legislative Standards Act 1992)
who have been the subject of investigations not properly authorised under
existing umbrella referrals. The breach, though arguably tenuous, is
justified given the validation gives effect to Parliament's original intention
that the CRC and the former QCCMC have discretion to make umbrella
referrals.
Consultation
The Department of the Premier and Cabinet, the Queensland Police
Service, the Crime and Misconduct Commission, the Director of Public
Prosecutions and the Chair of the Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct
Committee were consulted in relation to the CMC Act amendments.
In relation to the amendments to the Summary Offences Act 2005,
consultation was undertaken with the Department of the Premier and
Cabinet, the Queensland Police Service and the Department of Transport
and Main Roads.
Notes on Provisions
Part 1 Preliminary
Clause 1 establishes the short title of the Act as the Crime and Misconduct
and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009.
Page 7
Crime and Misconduct and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009
Part 2 Amendment of Crime and
Misconduct Act 2001
Clause 2 provides that this Part amends the Crime and Misconduct Act
2001 (`the CMC Act').
Clause 3 amends section 5(2) of the CMC Act to generalise this reference
to the commission's function to investigate major crime. This
complements the amendments contained in clause 6 below, which reframe
Part 2, Division 2 of the CMC Act to deal expressly with the concepts of
`specific' referrals of a particular incident of major crime and `general'
referrals of categories or sub-categories of major crime.
Clause 4 makes a minor amendment to section 25 of the CMC Act to make
reference to the referral arrangements under Part 2, Division 2 of the Act,
rather than a narrow reference to just section 27. This complements the
amendment contained in clause 12 below.
Clause 5 makes a minor amendment to section 26 of the CMC Act to make
reference to the referral arrangements under Part 2, Division 2 of the Act.
Similarly to the amendment contained in clause 4 above, this complements
the amendment contained in clause 12 below.
Clause 6 replaces sections 27 and 28 of the CMC Act with new sections
26A, 27 and 28. These provisions reframe Part 2, Division 2 to give effect
to Parliament's original intention that the reference committee be able to
make both specific referrals of particular incidents of major crime and
general referrals of categories or sub-categories of major crime and further,
that the reference committee is to apply public interest considerations to all
referrals made by it.
New section 26A contains definitions of `general referral', `referral' and
`specific referral'.
New section 27 makes it clear that the CRC may make a specific referral or
a general referral to the Crime and Misconduct Commission (CMC) for
investigation.
The referral of a particular incident of major crime is known as a `specific
referral'. It must identify the particular incident of major crime to be
investigated and at least either the persons involved or suspected of being
involved in the incident/s or the activity constituting or suspected of
constituting the particular incident/s. For example, the CRC may refer the
Page 8
Crime and Misconduct and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009
disappearance and suspected murder of John Doe in Brisbane between 1
January 31 December 2008 to the CMC for investigation.
A broader referral of major crime is known as a `general referral' and must
identify the major crime to be investigated. It is intended that a general
referral could relate to one or more categories of major crime, as currently
defined (e.g. terrorism) or a subcategory of major crime (e.g. internet-based
a criminal paedophilia). To date, general referrals have tended to relate to a
subcategory of major crime. There is no requirement for this type of
referral to identify the persons whose conduct is in question, describe that
conduct, state when the conduct occurred or state in a detailed way (i.e. not
broadly) the alleged criminal activities. However, there is nothing to
prevent a general referral from identifying the persons involved, or
suspected of being involved, in the major crime and/or the activities
constituting, or suspected of constituting, the category or subcategory of
major crime. For example, the CRC may refer the investigation of
criminal activity involving drug trafficking and violence engaged in by
members of outlaw motor cycle gangs and their associates.
New section 27(6) clarifies that a specific or general referral may relate to
any circumstances implying or any allegations that a particular major crime
or category of major crime may have already been committed, may be
currently being committed or may be committed in the future.
New section 27(7) provides that a specific referral may be initiated by the
CRC or requested by the Assistant Commissioner, Crime or the Police
Commissioner. A general referral may be initiated by the CRC or
requested by the Assistant Commissioner, Crime. This reflects current
practice in that the Police Commissioner has only ever requested specific
referrals.
New section 27(8) maintains the current requirement that a referral must be
in writing.
New section 28 sets out the matters about which the CRC must be satisfied
before making a referral and in doing so, clarifies Parliament's original
intention that public interest considerations apply to all referrals, whether
initiated by the CRC or requested by the Assistant Commissioner, Crime or
by the Police Commissioner.
Subsection 28(1) restates the threshold considerations for a specific referral
currently set out in section 28(2) of the CMC Act. These apply to any
specific referral, whether initiated by the CRC or requested by the Assistant
Commissioner, Crime or by the Police Commissioner and include the
Page 9
Crime and Misconduct and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009
public interest. New subsection 28(3) essentially restates section 28(3) of
the CMC Act and provides guidance about matters the CRC may take into
account when deciding whether it is in the public interest to refer a
particular incident of major crime to the CMC.
Subsection 28(2) provides that the threshold consideration for a general
referral is the public interest. New subsections 28(3) and (4) provide
guidance about the matters the CRC may take into account when deciding
whether it is in the public interest to refer major crime to the CMC for
investigation. Read together, new subsections 28(2), (3) and (4) restructure
the threshold consideration for general referrals in such a way as to restate
the issue of whether or not a police investigation into the subject of the
referral would be effective in new subsection 28(4), as a subset of the
mandatory broad public interest consideration under new subsection 28(2),
rather than as a separately identified threshold consideration (as it currently
appears in section 28(1) of the CMC Act). New subsections 28(2)-(4)
achieve the same outcome as the assessment of whether or not the
investigation is a justifiable use of the CMC's resources will invariably
entail consideration of the likely effectiveness of an investigation by the
police service.
Clause 7 amends subsection 29(2) of the CMC Act to enable the CRC to
direct the CMC to end a particular crime investigation if the CRC considers
the investigation is not in the public interest. The CRC's consideration of
the public interest in this context is not limited by new subsection 28(3) or
(4) because section 29(2), as amended, now deals with the relevant matters
for the CRC to have regard to when considering giving directions. This
amendment achieves greater consistency with the `front end'
considerations the CRC must apply under new section 28 before making a
referral in the first instance.
Clause 8 inserts a new section 29A which reinforces the CRC's current
oversight role in respect of the CMC's crime function. It is triggered
whenever the CRC receives notification from the Assistant Commissioner,
Crime that the CMC has commenced an investigation under an existing
general referral. This notification requirement is dealt with under section
277 of the CMC Act, which is amended by clause 13 below. As soon as
practicable after receiving such a notification, the CRC must consider
whether directions are required in respect of that particular crime
investigation. For example, the CRC may consider it necessary to limit the
exercise of the CMC's powers in that instance.
Page 10
Crime and Misconduct and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009
Clause 9 makes a minor amendment to section 30 of the CMC Act to omit
redundant text.
Clause 10 inserts new section 30A in Chapter 2, Part 2, Division 2. This
provision establishes a mechanism to achieve periodic review of general
referrals by the CRC to ensure they remain appropriate over time. The
review function is a logical adjunct to the CRC's crime referral function
and is consistent with its role to provide independent oversight of the
CMC's performance of its crime function. It is also an efficient use of
resources for the CRC to reconsider the appropriateness of a referral
against the threshold considerations required to be assessed when the
referral was initially made or last confirmed.
Under this review process:
· the CRC must review each general referral within five years of it
being made or last confirmed under this review provision subsection
30A(1)
· the CRC must give fresh consideration to the threshold considerations
set out in new subsections 28(2) (4) subsection 30A(2)
· the Assistant Commissioner, Crime may make submissions in respect
of a referral initially requested by him or her subsection 30A(3)
· if asked by the CRC for information to assist in making its review
decision, the Assistant Commissioner, Crime is obliged to comply
with the request and give the CRC the help it needs to consider that
information subsection 30A(4)
· the CRC may decide to confirm the referral (with or without
amendment), replace the referral with a referral to the Police
Commissioner under section 31 of the CMC Act or discontinue the
referral subsection 30A(5)
· if the CRC does not make a review decision before the five year
period, the referral lapses.
New section 391 (discussed in clause 14 below) makes transitional
arrangements for the review of general referrals in place at commencement.
Clause 11 amends section 31 of the CMC Act to clarify that a referral to the
Police Commissioner under that section may relate to a particular incident
of major crime or major crime more broadly.
Clause 12 makes a minor amendment to section 275 of the CMC Act to
make reference to the referral arrangements under Part 2, Division 2 of the
Page 11
Crime and Misconduct and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009
Act. This is complemented by the amendments contained in clauses 4 and
5 above. It also inserts a statement of the CRC's function to review general
referrals under new section 30A. This complements the amendments
contained in clause 10 above.
Clause 13 amends section 277 of the CMC Act to better position the CRC
to monitor the use of general referrals for ongoing and emergent crime
investigations. It requires the Assistant Commissioner, Crime to notify the
CRC as soon as practicable after the CMC commences an investigation
under an existing general referral. This notification triggers a requirement
under new section 29A (discussed in clause 8 above) for the CRC to
consider whether a direction should be given under section 29 in respect of
that particular investigation. Clause 13 also amends section 277 to
facilitate the provision of information by the Assistant Commissioner,
Crime to the CRC about a particular crime investigation conducted or
being conducted under an existing general referral. These requirements are
additional to those currently placed on the Assistant Commissioner, Crime
by section 277.
Clause 14 inserts a new Part 7 in Chapter 8 of the CMC Act. This Part
contains provisions validating past use of general referrals for crime
investigations conducted under the repealed Crime Commission Act 1997
and the current CMC Act.
New section 386 validates referrals or purported referrals to the former
Queensland Crime Commission (QCC) by the former Queensland Crime
Commission Management Committee (QCCMC) under the repealed Crime
Commission Act 1997 ('the repealed Act'). It provides that section 355(1)
of the CMC Act is and always was effective to declare each of these
referrals to be a validly made referral of major crime to the CMC by the
CRC under the CMC Act. It also validates any referrals or purported
referrals made to the CMC by the CRC under the CMC Act prior to
commencement of these amendments.
New section 387 declares a referral mentioned in new section 386 to be
either a specific referral or a general referral (depending on the extent to
which the referral identifies major crime or a particular incident of major
crime) by the CRC to the CMC under section 27, as amended by clause 6
above. This declaration takes effect on the commencement of these
amendments.
Page 12
Crime and Misconduct and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009
New section 388 preserves any limitations imposed by the former QCCMC
on, or amendments made by the CRC in respect of, a referral or purported
referral mentioned in new sections 386 or 387.
New section 389 validates a crime investigation conducted or being
conducted under a referral mentioned in new section 386 or 387. This
validation is intended to apply in respect of (a) investigations commenced
and completed by the former QCC under the repealed Act; (b)
investigations commenced by the former QCC under the repealed Act,
transitioned to and completed by the CMC under the current CMC Act; (c)
investigations commenced by the former QCC under the repealed Act,
transitioned to but not yet completed by the CMC under the current CMC
Act; (d) investigations commenced and completed by the CMC under the
current CMC Act and (e) investigations commenced but not yet completed
by the CMC under the current CMC Act. The operation of this provision
does not limit the effect of a validation under new sections 386 or 387.
New section 390 validates the use of information or evidence obtained by a
crime investigation conducted or being conducted under a referral or
purported referral mentioned in new section 386 or 387 for the performance
of a function of the former QCC under the repealed Act or of the CMC under
the CMC Act (e.g. crime, prevention, intelligence or misconduct) or the
performance of a function of any law enforcement agency or prosecuting
authority (including, by use of the words `directly or indirectly', their
employees or agents) to which the former QCC or CMC has provided the
information or evidence.
New section 391 makes transitional arrangements for the review of general
referrals in place at the time these amendments commence. The CRC must
review each of these referrals under new section 30A(2)-(5) within two
years from commencement. If the CRC does not make a review decision
under new section 30A(5) about an existing referral within this period, the
referral lapses. The purpose of subsection 391(5) is to set the date on
which an existing referral is confirmed under this transitional arrangement
as the date from which the future review period starts running under new
section 30A.
Clause 15 amends the dictionary in Schedule by inserting the new
definitions of `general referral', `specific referral' and `referral'.
Page 13
Crime and Misconduct and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009
Part 3 Amendment of Summary
Offences Act 2005
Clause 16 provides that Part 3 of the Bill amends the Summary Offences
Act 2005.
Clause 17 inserts new section 26 into the Act entitled `Endangering the safe
use of a vehicle by throwing an object or by a similar activity'.
Subclause (1) provides that a person must not unlawfully -
(a) throw an object at a vehicle that is in the course of travelling; or
(b) place an object in or near to the path a vehicle is using or may use in
the course of travelling; or
(c) direct a beam of light from a laser at or near a vehicle that is in the
course of travelling;
in a way that endangers or is likely to endanger the safe use of the vehicle.
The maximum penalty for this offence is two years imprisonment.
`Unlawfully' is defined in Schedule 2 of the Summary Offences Act 2005 as
meaning `without authorisation, justification or excuse by law', thereby
ensuring the availability of the defences and excuses under the Criminal
Code.
Subclause (2) outlines what conduct is captured by the phrase `throwing an
object at a vehicle' in subsection (1)(a). The conduct captured includes
throwing or dropping an object onto or near the vehicle or into or near to
the path of the vehicle.
By structuring the offence in this way it confines the basic statement of the
offence to three types of conduct, with the first limb capturing a broader
range of conduct pursuant to the operation of this subclause. Police will be
able to charge the offence in terms of the provision as set out in subsection
(1).
Subclause (3) provides that the following does not matter:
(a) the intention with which an object is thrown, dropped or placed or a
beam of light from a laser is directed (in any case, the initial act);
(b) whether contact is made with a vehicle;
Page 14
Crime and Misconduct and Summary Offences Amendment Bill 2009
(c) without limiting paragraph (a), whether a particular vehicle is
involved;
(d) in relation to the requirement that a vehicle be in the course of
travelling - whether the vehicle is moving or stationary;
(e) whether a vehicle is in the sight of the offender or present when the
initial act is done.
As outlined above, subclause (1) requires the conduct to occur in relation to
a vehicle in the course of travelling. This is to ensure that the offence
doesn't apply to conduct directed at vehicles parked in a car park or
driveway. However subsection (3)(d) provides that it doesn't matter
whether the vehicle is moving or stationary. This confirms that the
provision is intended to apply to vehicles which are stationary at a set of
lights or sitting in heavy traffic.
Subclause (3)(e) confirms that a degree of immediacy is not required
between the conduct and the vehicle. For example, the provision is
intended to apply where the offender throws an object from a distant
vantage point even when there are no vehicles in the immediate vicinity or
where a person places an object on the road at a time when there are no
vehicles in sight.
Subclause (4) contains the definitions of terms used in this section such as
`beam of light', `laser', `place', `path' and `throw'. The broad definition
of `vehicle' used in Queensland's Criminal Code, which includes a motor
vehicle, train, aircraft, or vessel, is adopted for the purposes of this section.
© State of Queensland 2009
Page 15