Activity 2c

1. The task word ‘discuss’ require students to consider both sides of something. In this case, ‘discussing’ the ability of committal proceedings to achieve the principles of justice requires students to write about relevant strengths and weaknesses of committal proceedings. Responses will vary according to the arguments selected.

       Arguments in support of committal proceedings achieving the principles of justice include:

• Committal proceedings are commenced within 3-6 months after the accused has been charged. This imposes a discipline on the prosecution and the police to gather evidence in a timely manner.
• Regardless of the number of matters that are actually dismissed for a lack of evidence, the very requirement that a case must be made out acts as a filtering system that discourages the OPP from commencing weak cases.
• The committal system has been reformed over time to improve its efficacy. The current test is rigorous, and has tripled the number of cases dismissed at committal in the three years following the reform.
• In its 2019 submission to the VLRC committals inquiry, Victoria Legal Aid argued that committals often facilitate early resolution by ensuring that the accused has sufficient information to allow them to make an informed decision about whether to enter a guilty plea prior to trial. This can reduce the number of matters going to trial, which saves court costs and reduces backlogs overall.
• Without the Prasad direction, the committal is one of the last protections against prosecuting weak cases.
• Key issues are identified at committal. This ensures that only matters in dispute proceed to argument at trial. Anything on which the parties agree can be settled at committal. This reduces the time and cost of trial.
• In the experience of Tasmania, Western Australia and the Northern Territory, which removed committals, sending all matters directly to higher courts has resulted in ‘bottlenecks’ and delays. In its 2019 submission to the VLRC’s committals inquiry, Victoria Legal Aid reported that lawyers in these jurisdictions also found that police were not disclosing evidence to the prosecutor early in the process, and that many trial commenced without the accused knowing the full case against them.

       Arguments against committal proceedings achieving the principles of justice include:

• Committal proceedings are an additional step in criminal procedure that delay resolution.
• Because of the high number of matters that are settled with a guilty plea at the committal stage, or returned to the Magistrates’ Court to be heard summarily, it is important that the accused have competent legal representation. This extends the time for which the accused must fund legal representation.
• There is no right to legal representation at the pre-trial committal stage under common law. This may result in inadequate representation for the accused at an important stage where evidence is being explored and challenged.
• The accused is not required to present evidence for their defence, while the prosecution must disclose its full case. This creates a disparity in knowledge between the parties, and can result in the prosecution being surprised at trial and unprepared to examine defence arguments.
• Not all classes of witnesses are exempt from oral examination at a committal. If a witness is examined at a contested committal and then again at trial, this increases the trauma of the experience.
• The high rate of guilty pleas entered following a committal can be demoralising for victims and witnesses who saw sometimes multiple charges being tested at the committal, and who may also have experienced personal hardship being examined and cross-examined at a committal hearing.
• In its 2019 Issues Paper into the committals inquiry, the VLRC noted that applications to cross-examine witnesses at committal were granted 90.5 per cent of the time.Committals are generally not conducted on the handupbrief if the defence wishes to examine prosecutionwitnesses, even though reducing this was the purpose ofthe 2014 reform.                                                                                                                                                                             

2. The task word ‘evaluate’ require students to consider both sides of something, as well as express an opinion judging the relative strengths of the arguments. For example, a student might argue, based on evidence when referring to the arguments for and against committal proceedings, that they do achieve one principle of justice. Responses will vary according to the arguments selected.