Please note: This is an extract from Hansard only. Hansard extracts are reproduced with permission from the Parliament of Western Australia.

JUSTICES OF THE PEACE BILL 2003
Introduction and First Reading

Bill introduced, on motion by Mr J.A. McGinty (Attorney General), and read a first time.

Second Reading

MR J.A. McGINTY (Fremantle - Attorney General) [7.32 pm]: I move -

That the Bill be now read a second time.

The Bill is also part of the package of legislation that will reform Western Australia’s lower court system. Importantly, this Bill addresses the issues of recruitment and training for justices of the peace. Given their roles and responsibilities, it is important that our community has confidence in persons who are appointed as JPs and, correspondingly, that JPs have the requisite training. There are more than 3 300 JPs in Western Australia. They are men and women who perform a wide range of services for the community and who are involved in the justice system.
The concept of justices of the peace goes back to the fourteenth century. Therefore, in this context at least, the Justices Act of 1902 might seem relatively new. Initially, a JP’s function was to arrest suspects and inquire into felonies and trespasses. JPs had no jurisdiction to sentence offenders. Gradually, JPs were allowed to punish offenders and, ultimately, conduct criminal trials with a jury in all but the most serious cases that were dealt with by a judge. From the fourteenth century, the practice of allowing JPs to hear and determine certain offences on the lower end of the scale has continued. This has formed the basis for the establishment of this State’s system of Courts of Petty Sessions.

Until the twentieth century, JPs were taken from the ranks of “gentlemen” or senior ranks of the military. From this history is derived the requirement that JPs be persons of good standing in the community. The Bill retains the very best traditions of JPs and their role. In doing so, the Bill will replace the 101-year-old legislation with dedicated new legislation that better defines the role of a JP for our modern community.

It is important to remember that JPs are volunteers and this commendable feature of their office will be retained. JPs perform a range of important court-related duties, including dealing with minor court matters, considering bail applications and issuing warrants and summonses. They also perform administrative duties such as swearing and affirming affidavits and statutory declarations. The Bill has three important components. First, it will establish specific criteria and guidelines to be considered by the minister when recommending to the Governor appointments and the termination of appointments of JPs. Second, it will provide that JPs must satisfactorily complete an approved training course prior to their appointment. Third, the Bill requires current JPs to take up these training opportunities, unless they have previously completed an approved training course.

The Bill proposes to abolish ex officio appointments for members of the Executive Council, mayors of cities or towns and shire presidents. Such appointments currently terminate when the mayor or shire president ceases to hold office. Of course, those people, like anyone else, can become JPs by making an application and completing the training course. It is intended as a matter of policy that such persons will be appointed as a matter of course. This recognises the importance of JPs and their integral part in our system of government, which has as one of its premises the separation of powers.

The Bill will also formalise current policy. It provides that JPs must cease judicial or quasi-judicial functions at 70 years of age, except with approval of the minister, in which case JPs may continue to 75 years of age. These provisions do not relate to administrative duties such as witnessing signatures. I commend the Bill to the House.

Debate adjourned, on motion by Ms K. Hodson-Thomas.