5. DAVID GARRETT (ACT) Link to this
to the Minister of Justice
Does he agree that the law on self-defence needs thorough review, following the throwing out of the case against Virender Singh and ongoing violence in our community, particularly against small-shop owners?
Hon SIMON POWER (Minister of Justice) Link to this
Not quite yet. I recognise that there is considerable public anxiety about whether Mr Singh should have been charged in the first place. Although I do not want to comment on the specifics of the case, I have asked officials for advice on how section 48 of the Crimes Act is applied, in terms of both how police exercise their discretion to charge and how broadly the courts have dealt with such issues.
Does the Minister agree that as a matter of principle a person’s home is his or her castle and that someone invading it does so at his or her peril; if not, why not?
Section 48 of the Crimes Act, as the member will know, states: “Every one is justified in using, in the defence of himself or another, such force as, in the circumstances as he believes them to be, it is reasonable to use”. Also, section 55 of the Crimes Act permits “such force as is necessary to prevent the forcible breaking and entering” of a person’s home. It is those matters and the application of them that I have asked my officials to look at.
Hon Jim AndertonWhat sentence would be imposed on a hypothetical shop keeper who was successfully prosecuted for defending himself if he had twice previously been robbed and had defended himself and if the Government’s “three strikes and you’re out” bill, promoted by the member who asked the primary question, was operating; and is it possible that a hypothetical person who overreacted to being repeatedly robbed could get a harsher sentence under that proposed law than the robber himself?