• September 25, 2017, 12:05:25 AM
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search

News:

Forum/Membership Maintenance: last completed on Monday 9th November 2015

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Public Safety Protection Orders Qld  (Read 496 times)

Prickle

  • Forum Moderator
  • Legendary Vent Member
  • *****
  • Karma: 44
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17200
Public Safety Protection Orders Qld
« on: February 16, 2017, 11:53:36 AM »



In just under 3 weeks the 2nd stage of the Serious and Organised Amendment Bill will be enforceable by the police on the the 9th March not only the Consorting Laws but also laws called the Public Safety Protection Orders will come into action. An extract of those laws are below.....Public Safety Orders....Restricted Premises Orders.....Fortification Removal Orders

Peace and Good Behaviour Act 1982
-
Creation of new objects for the Peace and Good Behaviour Act

The Bill significantly amends the Peace and Good Behaviour Act to create a scheme of three new
public safety protection orders: public safety orders; restricted premises orders and fortification
removal orders. These orders will provide a multi-level strike to pre-emptively disrupt criminal
and anti-social behaviour and protect public safety. The scheme provides for orders and notices to
be issued by commissioned police officers and the Magistrates Court.

The Bill amends the Peace and Good Behaviour Act to set out new objects for the Act to make it
clear that its main object is to protect the safety, welfare, and peace and good order of the
community from risks presented by people engaging in anti-social, disorderly or criminal conduct.
Importantly, the objects clarify that it is not Parliament’s intention that the powers under the
Peace and Good Behaviour Act should be exercised in a way that diminishes the freedom of persons in
the State to participate in advocacy, protest, dissent or industrial action.

For each of the new orders created by the Bill, the decision maker (whether it be a police officer
or a judicial officer) must take into account whether the making of the order will assist
in achieving the objects of the Act before deciding whether an order should be made.

For each of the new orders created by the Bill, the decision maker (whether it be a police
officer or a judicial officer) must take into account whether the making of the order will assist
in achieving the objects of the Act before deciding whether an order should be made.

The public safety protection order scheme created by the Bill is a civil scheme and therefore all
questions of fact in proceedings brought under the scheme (other than proceedings for a criminal
offence) will be decided on the balance of probabilities.

- Public Safety Orders

The Bill reflects the recommendation of the COA review to transfer the public safety orders from
the COA to the Peace and Good Behaviour Act (Part 9.3 of the COA Review Report), through the
establishment of Public Safety Orders in Part 2 of the Act.

The Bill provides that a public safety order can prohibit a person or group of people from
entering, attending, remaining or doing certain things on a premises, at an event or in a stated
area. To breach a public safety order is a misdemeanour (i.e. an indictable offence)
punishable by a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment or 300 penalty units.

A variation from the existing public safety orders under the COA is that the Bill enables a
Commissioned police officer (i.e. rank of Inspector or above) to make a public safety order of up
to seven days duration if satisfied that: the presence of a person or group of persons at an event,
or within an area poses a serious risk to public safety; and the making of the order is appropriate
in the circumstances.

Information provided to the QPS in relation to planned events or activities is often received at
short notice. Where QPS need to protect public safety and security on an immediate basis, applying
to the court would not be practical or effective. It is likely that by the time the officer had
prepared the application, served it on the relevant person or group and appeared before a court to
obtain the order, the public safety or security risk would be over. Police-
issued public safety orders for a period of 7 days will address this issue.

The well-known ‘Ballroom Blitz’ at Carrara on the Gold Coast in March 2006 provides a
good example of how the scheme could have been applied. The Ballroom Blitz involved a fight
between members of the Finks and Hells Angels OMCGs at a boxing match at the Royal Pines Resort,
during which three people were shot, two stabbed and $40,000.00 in damage was caused. The incident
developed over a short period of time. A police issued public safety order may have assisted the
police to separate and remove persons from the location once they became aware of the situation
developing, and may have prevented the incident from occurring or reducing its severity. It would
not have been possible for the officers to prepare, appear before a court and obtain a public
safety order in time to allow the powers to be exercised to respond to the situation that was
developing.

A police-issued public safety order that is 72 hours or longer can be appealed to
the
Magistrates Court. If police require an order that is longer than seven days in duration they
must make an application to the Magistrates Court.

The Bill gives the PIM an oversight function with respect to police-issued public safety
orders (see further in the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act below).

The Bill provides police with additional enforcement powers for the public safety orders both in
the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act (see below) and the Peace and Good Behaviour Act. In
the Peace and Good Behaviour Act police are empowered to: stop persons from entering places the
subject of public safety orders (a public safety place); stop, search and detain vehicles
approaching or leaving a public safety order place; and remove persons from a public safety place.
-
Restricted Premises Orders
The majority of the Taskforce found that a scheme based on the Restricted Premises Act 1943
(NSW) would be more effective, fairer and have better safeguards than the clubhouse offence at
section 60B of the Criminal Code (see page 200 of the Taskforce Report). The Bill reflects the
Taskforce recommendation (recommendation 19) by creating restricted premises orders in the Peace
and Good Behaviour Act.

The scheme in the Bill provides that a senior police officer (i.e. Sergeant or above) may make an
application to the Magistrates Court for a restricted premises order. The Magistrates Court may
make a restricted premises order if it is satisfied that: the senior police officer reasonably
suspects that one or more disorderly activities have taken place on the premises and are likely
to take place again on the premises; and that making the order is appropriate in the circumstances.
‘Disorderly activity’ is defined to include behaviour that is both anti-social and criminal. Further, a ‘recognised offender’ for the purpose of the consorting offence (see above) or a person who has been given an official warning under the consorting offence powers (an ‘associate of recognised offender’) being at premises is a ‘disorderly activity’ for the purpose of the restricted premises orders.
The Bill also provides that the premises already declared to be ‘prescribed premises’ under the Criminal Code (Criminal Organisations) Regulation 2013 are declared to be subject to a restricted premises order upon commencement of the new scheme; a declaration that will last for two years and with an option for a police officer to apply to the Magistrates Court to further extend the order for another two years. The Magistrate must make the order to extend if taking into account activity that occurred on the premises both before and after commencement of the Bill it is considered that disorderly activities are likely to take place on the premises again and that making the order is appropriate in the circumstances.

It is an offence for disorderly activity to take place on the premises after a restricted premises order has been made. The owner and/or occupier of the premises is liable to: for a first offence, a maximum penalty of 18 months imprisonment or 150 penalty units, and for a second or subsequent offence, a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment or 300 penalty units.
Police officers are empowered under a restricted premises order to search premises, subject to such declaration, without warrant on an unlimited number of occasions for the duration of the order.
The Bill also provides that the police are empowered under the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act to apply to a Magistrate to obtain a search warrant for any premises (i.e. including premises that are not yet subject to a restricted premises order) if they reasonably believe that disorderly activities are taking place on the premises and are likely to take place again on the premises.

Police officers searching premises under a search warrant or subject to a restricted premises order may seize any item defined as a ‘prohibited item’ under the scheme. Prohibited items include: alcohol, drugs, firearms, explosives and anything that is capable of being used inside premises to contribute to or enhance the ambience of the premises in support of the sale or consumption of liquor or drugs or entertainment of demoralising character e.g. a bar fit out, an entertainment system, a pool or billiard table or a stripper’s pole.

The Bill further provides that items that are seized during the exercise of search powers (either under the Peace and Good Behaviour Act or the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act) can be forfeited to the State by the Commissioner of Police. An application to the Magistrates Court for the return of the prohibited item can be made within 21 days. A Magistrate can order the return of the item only if the applicant can prove that: they are the lawful owner of the item, the item was seized on an unlawful basis and it is appropriate for the item to be returned.
-
Fortification Removal Orders

The COA Review provided the Government with three options with respect to fortification removal orders: 1) relocate the court-ordered model under the COA to another legislative instrument; 2) initiate a police-issue model; or 3) expand police search powers (see 9.4 of the COA Review Report). The scheme provided for in the Bill consists of two parts: stop and desist notices that are issued by a Commissioned police officer (a variant of a police-issued model) and fortification removal orders which are issued by the Magistrates Court (a court-ordered model).
The Bill creates a ‘stop and desist notice’ scheme that empowers a Commissioned police officer (i.e. rank of Inspector or above) to issue a notice if they observe excessive fortifications being erected on premises that are being used for criminal activity, or are habitually occupied by recognised offenders and associates of recognised offenders, or participants in a criminal organisation. This is not a feature of the COA fortification removal order provisions. The stop and desist notice will provide the police officer with 14 days to make an application for a fortification removal order. If an application for the order is not lodged in 14 days the stop and desist notice will lapse. If a person breaches the stop and desist notice it will be evidence of the grounds required for the police to obtain a fortification removal order unless the respondent can prove otherwise.

A senior police officer (rank of Sergeant of above) may apply to the Magistrate Court for a fortification removal order which will require an owner or occupier of a premises to remove fortifications from a premises within a certain period of time. If the fortifications are not removed police are empowered to remove the fortifications by whatever force is necessary. The Magistrates Court will be able to make a fortification removal order if they are satisfied that: the premises may be connected to serious criminal activity; or are habitually occupied by recognised offenders, associates of recognised offenders or participants in criminal organisations; and the extent of the fortification is excessive for the lawful use of the premise; and making the order is appropriate in the circumstances.
The Bill empowers police to enter premises and remove fortifications. The Commissioner of Police has the power to forfeit fortifications that are removed by police.
A person who intentionally hinders the removal or modification of a fortification or the taking of any enforcement action under the Act commits a misdemeanour (i.e. an indictable offence). The offence is punishable by a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment.

Logged
SINNERS MCC Brisbane Australia
“Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.”
Pages: [1]   Go Up