- Office of Public Prosecutions

Transcription

ANNUAL REPORT 2007/08
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
OFFICE OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
COMMITTEE FOR PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
SERVING JUSTICE
SERVING THE COMMUNITY
CONTENTS
Victoria’s prosecution service
3
ANNUAL REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
6
Message from the Director of Public Prosecutions
7
Appeals against sentence in 2007/08
8
Celebrating 25 years of service to the Victorian community
11
Victoria’s Crown Prosecutors: a new era begins
12
ANNUAL REPORT OF THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
15
Message from the Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
16
What we do
19
Our people
20
The OPP’s legal practice and organisational structure
22
Delivering a high quality, effective prosecution service
25
Pioneering a new approach to prosecuting sex offences
39
Reducing delays in the criminal justice system
43
Supporting victims and witnesses
46
Influencing legal policy and law reform
49
Building a distinctive, high-performing prosecution practice
53
ANNUAL REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE FOR PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
61
2007/08 Committee Report
62
FINANCIAL REPORT OF THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS*
63
2007/08 Financial Report
64
APPENDICES*
89
2007/08 Appendices
90
*These sections are available on CD in some versions of this report
This report presents:
• The 2007/08 Annual Report of the Director
of Public Prosecutions pursuant to section
12 of the Public Prosecutions Act 1994
• The 2007/08 Annual Report of the
Committee for Public Prosecutions
pursuant to section 45 of the
Public Prosecutions Act 1994
• The 2007/08 Annual Report of the Office
of Public Prosecutions pursuant to the
Financial Management Act 1994.
Full financial statements for the
Office of Public Prosecutions are
provided in this report.
Additional information about the Office
of Public Prosecutions can be viewed at:
www.opp.vic.gov.au
Annual Report development
Office of Public Prosecutions
565 Lonsdale Street
Melbourne Victoria 3000
Writing and editorial services:
JF Communications
Design and production:
X2 Design
VICTORIA’S PROSECUTION SERVICE
The Director of Public Prosecutions
•(DPP),
the Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
(SPP), the Office of Public Prosecutions
(OPP) and Crown Prosecutors form
Victoria’s public prosecution service. This
service prosecutes people charged with
serious crimes in Victoria and conducts
these prosecutions in a spirit of fairness
and independent of the government of the
day. The core functions of the service are:
• advising the police on cases for possible
prosecution
• reviewing cases submitted by the police
for prosecution
• determining the charge where a decision
is made to prosecute
• preparing cases for court
• presenting cases in court
• supporting victims and witnesses
through the prosecution process
• where appropriate, making applications
to confiscate assets that have been
used in the commission of a crime or
purchased with the proceeds of crime.
The work of the DPP, SPP and OPP is
governed by many factors, including
the current law in Victoria, specific legal
processes that apply to particular cases,
prosecutorial ethics, guidelines issued by
the DPP and discretionary decisions that
are made in each case according to its facts
and circumstances.
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC
PROSECUTIONS (DPP)
conducts proceedings on behalf of the
State of Victoria (also known as the
Crown) in the County Court, Supreme
Court or High Court in relation to serious
crimes committed in Victoria. The DPP
also conducts committal proceedings in the
Magistrates’ Court and assists the Coroner
with inquests. In addition, the DPP has
the power to appeal against sentences in
certain circumstances.
In deciding whether or not to prosecute,
the DPP follows nationally agreed
guidelines and considers the interests of
the victim, the suspected offender and
the wider community. In exercising these
functions, the DPP must also have regard
to considerations of justice and fairness, as
well as the need to conduct prosecutions in
an effective and efficient manner.
The DPP is an independent statutory
officer appointed by the Governor in
Council and must be a person of no less
than eight years’ standing as a barrister and
solicitor of the Supreme Court of Victoria.
THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC
PROSECUTIONS (OPP)
The Office of Public Prosecutions
represents the DPP. Operating like a
large legal firm with the DPP as its only
client, the OPP prepares cases for the DPP
against people charged with serious crimes
and then presents these cases in court
using in-house Crown Prosecutors or by
briefing barristers from the Victorian Bar.
The head of the OPP is the Solicitor
for Public Prosecutions (who is appointed
by the Governor in Council). The OPP
is an independent statutory authority
comprising the Solicitor for Public
Prosecutions and a staff of solicitors, legal
executives, legal support and corporate
services staff. The OPP administers the
budget for both the OPP and DPP.
The OPP also prosecutes matters
whenever the Supreme Court and County
Court goes “on circuit” to conduct hearings
in locations across regional Victoria.
In conducting prosecutions, the OPP
provides advice to the police and other
agencies on prosecuting cases, negotiates
the early resolution of cases, keeps all cases
under continuous review and provides
support to victims and witnesses.
As well as preparing and prosecuting
cases, the OPP conducts and responds to
appeals against sentencing and conviction
orders of the Magistrates’ Court, responds
to applications for bail in the Supreme
Court and the Court of Appeal, brings
breaches of non-custodial orders back
before the Supreme and County Courts,
and conducts litigation on behalf of the
DPP to confiscate assets from criminals.
The OPP also provides advice to other
agencies and participates in law reform
activities relating to prosecutions.
MATTERS PROSECUTED BY THE
DPP AND THE OPP
Matters prosecuted by the DPP and the
OPP involve serious crimes or matters that
are of significance to the fair and effective
operation of the Victorian criminal justice
system. In particular, the DPP prosecutes:
• homicides
• corruption cases involving police
• serious sex offences
• major commercial crimes
• drug trafficking cases
• serious driving offences, such as
culpable driving
• occupational health and safety matters
involving death or serious injury.
In addition to prosecuting cases
investigated by Victoria Police, the OPP
prosecutes serious offences investigated
by a range of other agencies, including
WorkSafe, VicRoads, Corrections
Victoria, Consumer Affairs Victoria, the
Environment Protection Authority and
various government departments.
CROWN PROSECUTORS
Victoria’s Crown Prosecutors are
statutory appointees who appear in
court to represent the State of Victoria
in criminal cases. They are barristers
who work alongside the Office of Public
Prosecutions, effectively acting as the
OPP’s in-house counsel.
Crown Prosecutors present the
case against an accused person in the
Magistrates’ Court, County Court and
the Supreme Court. They also represent
the Crown in the High Court and the
Court of Appeal. They provide advice
on prosecuting cases to the Director of
Public Prosecutions, the Solicitor for Public
Prosecutions and staff of the OPP, and
make decisions about whether an accused
person should be indicted for trial.
Crown Prosecutors act on behalf
of the Director of Public Prosecutions
and are answerable to the DPP for the
performance of their duties. The day-today operations of the Crown Prosecutors’
Chambers are managed by the Chief
Crown Prosecutor.
DECIDING TO PROSECUTE
In making the decision to prosecute, the
DPP considers the following matters:
• Is there sufficient evidence to justify a
prosecution? There must be admissible,
substantial and reliable evidence that a
criminal offence has been committed by
the alleged offender.
• Is there a reasonable prospect of securing a
conviction? This includes an assessment of
how strong the case is likely to be when
presented in court.
• Taking into account all the circumstances,
does the public interest require a prosecution
to be pursued? Generally, the DPP will
proceed where there is sufficient evidence
to justify a prosecution. However, the
DPP is not obliged to prosecute all
offences and must weigh up the efficient
and appropriate use of public resources
against factors such as the seriousness of
the alleged offence, the availability of any
alternatives to prosecution, any mitigating
or aggravating circumstances, the need to
deter others from committing
OPP Annual Report 2007/08
3
VICTORIA’S PROSECUTION SERVICE
similar offences and the attitude of the
victim to a prosecution.
• Do special considerations apply to certain
types of prosecution? The prosecution of
a juvenile is regarded as a severe step
and the DPP may consider that there
are more effective methods of dealing
4
Annual Report 2007/08
with the matter, unless the seriousness
of the offence or the circumstances of
the offender dictate otherwise. Similarly,
there may be more effective options for
dealing with offenders who have a mental
impairment (such as an intellectual
disability or severe mental illness).
The DPP also has the power to refuse to
pursue a prosecution at any stage until a
verdict is reached. The DPP exercises this
power by entering a nolle prosequi with
the court. In effect, this notifies the court
that the prosecution will not proceed and
results in the matter being discontinued.
SUMMARY OF THE PROSECUTION AND COURT PROCESS
Investigation stage
Crime reported
Investigation by police
Charges are not filed
Police charge the alleged offender
• Offender held in custody (remand) or released
on bail or summonsed to appear in court
Summary (less serious) offences prosecuted by police
Indictable (serious) offences forwarded to OPP
for prosecution
Pre-trial stage
(Magistrates’ Court)
Filing hearing and committal mention
• May include bail application
Straight hand
up brief (bypass
committal hearing)
Contested committal
• Witnesses may be required to give evidence
Discharged
Committed to stand trial
DPP will review and
may take to trial
Plea not guilty
Reserved plea
Plea guilty
Trial stage
(County or Supreme Court)
Possible trial
End of case
Pre-trial hearing
• Case management conference
• Directions hearings
• Possible bail applications
Trial
• Witnesses are required to give evidence
Guilty
Not guilty
Hung jury
Possible retrial
End of case
Plea stage
Sentence stage
Appeal stage
(Court of Appeal or High Court)
Plea hearing
• Victim Impact Statement
• Plea guilty
• Compensation
Sentencing hearing
• Post sentence consider Victims Register
Appeals against conviction and/or sentence
• Possible bail application
Sentence appeal
dismissed
Sentence appeal
allowed and offender
is resentenced
End of case
Conviction appeal
dismissed
Conviction appeal
allowed
End of case
Possible retrial
5
ANNUAL REPORT OF THE
MESSAGE FROM THE
JEREMY RAPKE QC
•
The past year has been a time of
change, challenge and new directions for
Victoria’s prosecution service.
Since my appointment as Director
of Public Prosecutions in November
2007 I have focused upon maintaining
the legacy of excellence in prosecutions
inherited from my predecessor, Paul
Coghlan QC (now Justice Coghlan of the
Supreme Court of Victoria), I have strived
to continue to deliver a fair, efficient and
effective prosecution service for Victoria.
The nature of criminal prosecutions is
changing rapidly, and today much more
is expected of prosecutors. The matters
we prosecute now are more varied and
complex. We are required to keep pace
with a wide-ranging legislative agenda
and constantly evolving legal practices
and procedures. We are subjected to
more intense media and public scrutiny.
New technologies are being used in
crime-fighting. Delays in the criminal
justice system are at an all time high.
Victims of crime and vulnerable witnesses
require and deserve maximum support.
I can proudly say that Victoria’s Crown
Prosecutors meet all these challenges
with professionalism, integrity and
enthusiasm – thereby maintaining the
highest standards of service to the courts
and community.
The growing range of prosecution
matters means that, more than ever
before, we can offer some very exciting
and rewarding employment prospects for
the legal profession. This is reflected in the
success of our ongoing recruitment drive,
resulting in a number of new prosecutors
joining our team in 2007/08, including
some from interstate. In March 2008, we
welcomed a new Chief Crown Prosecutor,
Gavin Silbert SC. With more than 30
years of experience across all jurisdictions,
Gavin is a formidable prosecutor and
an invaluable addition to Victoria’s
prosecution service. I look forward to
working closely with him.
The past year also saw the continued
and successful prosecution of organised
crime and police corruption. To this end,
we worked closely with Victoria Police, the
Office of Police Integrity and other external
agencies. The important aspect of ensuring
a fair trial in some high-profile cases
required the prevention of the screening of
the Underbelly television series.
We successfully prosecuted matters
involving deaths and serious injuries on
behalf of WorkSafe, playing our part in
ensuring that all Victorians work in safe
and healthy environments.
Our Specialist Sex Offences Unit has
proved a success, achieving outstanding
results in its first full year of operation.
Hundreds of complex cases have been
handled by the unit and the unit’s
approach is demonstrative of exemplary
practice for prosecutions generally.
In recognition of the significance and
complexity of sex offence cases, I have
directed that some cases should be heard
in the Supreme Court (where they fit
prescribed guidelines). This introduces
greater flexibility in the listing of cases in
Victoria’s criminal courts and enables the
Supreme Court to develop binding rules
for use by other courts trying cases of
sexual assault.
The confiscation of tainted property
and assets continues to be a powerful
tool in the fight against crime. Our
dedicated team of skilled civil lawyers in
the Proceeds of Crime Directorate has
undoubtedly contributed to the success of
Victoria’s asset confiscation scheme, while
also establishing important precedents in
this area of law.
I am committed to continuing the
practice of my predecessor in ensuring
that every sentence passed by the County
and Supreme Courts is carefully reviewed.
Since my appointment, I have instituted
54 appeals to the Court of Appeal.
Regrettably, in my view, much of the
data on sentencing demonstrates that
some courts underrate the seriousness of
criminal offending by imposing inadequate
sentences. I believe that sentences
imposed ought to reflect more closely
the penalties set by Parliament, which in
turn are reflective of community concerns
and expectations. I am disappointed
that many Crown appeals are dismissed,
despite the courts being satisfied that the
sentences were manifestly inadequate,
due to the appellate principle of “double
jeopardy”. I am working to address this
anomaly to ensure that justice is delivered
to all Victorians.
On 1 January 2008, Victoria’s Charter
of Human Rights and Responsibilities
came into full operation. In response, I
have developed a new Director’s Policy,
taking into account the operation of this
new legislation. Further, our prosecutors
have participated in training workshops
about the Charter, as it is clear that this
legislation adds a new dimension to
our practice and it is likely that we will
find ourselves at the forefront of this
developing area of law.
I am also committed to developing a
career path for solicitor advocates within
the prosecution service. With the right
training, support and experience, these
solicitors can – and do – provide a very
high standard of prosecutions advocacy.
Their availability will reduce my reliance
on the private Bar for representation and
make prosecutions work more attractive
for young solicitors. I am hopeful that
this approach will encourage experienced
advocates to remain with the Office of
Public Prosecutions, instead of seeking
opportunities elsewhere.
I thank the staff of the OPP and the
Crown Prosecutors for their dedication
and hard work throughout 2007/08.
I particularly thank Angela Cannon,
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions until May
2008, for steering the reorganisation of the
OPP and for her unwavering commitment
to enhancing the reputation of our
prosecution service throughout Australia.
I want to pay a special tribute to my
predecessor, Paul Coghlan QC, for
his leadership, guidance and support
during his tenure as DPP. He was a great
inspiration to all who work in prosecutions
and he can be confident that we will
continue to live up to the high standards
he set as Victoria’s fifth DPP.
This year marks the 25th anniversary
of the appointment of Victoria’s (and
Australia’s) first Director of Public
Prosecutions. In such a landmark year, it
is appropriate that 2008 saw Melbourne
hosting the annual conference of
the Australian Association of Crown
Prosecutors – a conference that involved
a record number of prosecutors from
around Australia and the Pacific Rim. It
provided further recognition of Victoria’s
reputation for excellence and leadership
in prosecutions.
For the past 25 years, Victoria’s
prosecutors have served the community
with great distinction. During my term
as DPP, I intend to build on this strong
tradition – maintaining the integrity,
impartiality and independence of Victoria’s
prosecution service as we move into new
areas of practice, take on new challenges
and go forward as the premier prosecution
service in Australia.
JEREMY RAPKE QC
Director of Public Prosecutions
DPP Annual Report 2007/08
7
APPEALS AGAINST SENTENCE IN 2007/08
•
plays a vitally important role in
maintaining community trust and
confidence in the criminal justice system.
One of the DPP’s main functions in this
regard is appealing against sentences
imposed by the courts on the grounds that
they are inadequate.
Section 567A of the Crimes Act 1958
provides for an appeal to the Court of
Appeal against a sentence passed by the
County Court or the Supreme Court where
the DPP considers that a different sentence
should have been passed and is satisfied
that an appeal should be brought in the
public interest.
There are well-defined legal limits to
the DPP’s power to appeal. As the power
to appeal encroaches upon the principle
that a person should not be placed in
double jeopardy (which states that no
one should be tried or punished twice for
the same offence), the DPP must exercise
the right to appeal according to wellestablished legal guidelines. In general,
the DPP will not launch an appeal unless
an error of sentencing principle by the
sentencing judge can be demonstrated.
Such an error may include sentences that
are manifestly inadequate or inconsistent
in sentencing standards.
The Director for Public Prosecutions,
Jeremy Rapke QC, has indicated publicly
that he intends to make sentencing reviews
a priority of his term, with the aim of
encouraging the courts to give sufficient
regard to the maximum penalties set by the
Victorian parliament in matters such as drug
trafficking, homicide, serious sex crimes and
major fraud.
In 2007/08, 27 DPP appeals against
sentence were completed. Three of these
appeals were abandoned. Of the 24 appeals
where judgment was delivered by the court,
eight were allowed and 16 were dismissed.
A sample of these appeals is set out on the
following pages. A list of all Crown appeals
instituted pursuant to section 567A of the
Crimes Act 1958 is set out in Appendix 3.
DPP v PAU
Mr P, aged 27, received a sentence of 11
years and nine months’ imprisonment after
pleading guilty to two counts of theft, three
counts of armed robbery, one count of arson
and one count of intentionally causing
serious injury. These offences occurred over
a period of four weeks, during which Mr P
and a co-offender stole two cars and set one
of them alight, held up a TAB and then shot
and seriously injured a South Melbourne
Market stallholder, after following him
from the market, demanding money
and threatening him with a baseball bat.
While it was the co-offender who shot the
stallholder, Mr P did nothing to stop him or
to assist the victim.
The consequences for the stallholder
were profound and permanent. Aged in his
early thirties, he is now a paraplegic and is
confined to a wheelchair. He also suffered
substantial financial losses.
At the time of sentencing, Mr P
was serving a sentence of six years’
imprisonment (with a non-parole period of
four years and six months) imposed upon
him in 2006 for a rape committed in 1999.
The DPP appealed the sentence on the
grounds that the judge failed to order that
any part of the total sentence be served on
top of the earlier sentence. The DPP argued
that this meant that Mr P would be eligible
for parole after only six and a half years, a
manifestly inadequate outcome.
The Court of Appeal agreed with the
DPP, noting that the serious and violent
nature of the offences – and their grave and
lasting consequences – warranted “a stern,
effective penalty in addition to the sentence
imposed on the earlier count of rape”. In
the lead judgment, Justice Nettle stated
that any minimum term imposed “must
be sufficient to constitute just punishment
and to maintain general deterrence”. In this
instance, “the absence of some cumulation,
and more particularly the consequent
UNDERBELLY BANNED IN VICTORIA
In the Victorian Supreme Court in February 2008, the DPP sought
a court order restraining the broadcasting of the Channel Nine
television program, Underbelly, due to concerns about the effect
the program would have upon the fair trial of the accused in an
upcoming murder case. The television drama series purported
to depict the so-called “gangland wars”, which raged among a
number of criminal factions in Victoria between 1998 and 2006.
Justice Betty King granted the order after viewing all 13
proposed episodes of the program and agreeing that it might
interfere with the ability of a jury to consider the evidence in the
pending murder trial. The Supreme Court and the DPP were
concerned to ensure, as far as possible, that the accused would
have a fair trial.
Justice King initially made an order prohibiting “the transmission
and publication of the television series Underbelly ... by any
television channel, free-to-air or cable/pay television in the State of
Victoria until after the completion of the trial and verdict ...”. Justice
King’s orders also prohibited publication of the program on the
internet in Victoria. This order was varied by Justice King after a
8
newspaper reported that the first episode of Underbelly had been
recorded interstate and played to patrons of a hotel in Melbourne
by the proprietor.
At the time of the making of the orders, the Director of Public
Prosecutions Mr Jeremy Rapke QC said: “Although the temporary
prohibition on broadcasting Underbelly is unfortunate for some
people, including those Victorians who wanted to watch the
program as scheduled, the granting of the injunction by Justice
King recognises the importance of an accused person’s right to
receive a fair trial, and the undesirability of the timing of criminal
trials being influenced by television programming.”
Following the hearing, General Television Corporation Pty Ltd
broadcast the first episodes of Underbelly throughout Australia, with
the exception of Victoria. General Television Corporation Pty Ltd
also appealed against Justice King’s decision to the Victorian Court
of Appeal.
On 26 March 2008, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.
However, the Court amended the orders made by Justice King
to limit their operation to Channel Nine and its related corporate
setting of a non-parole period of only six
and a half years, has resulted in an effective
additional minimum term which is so
manifestly inadequate as to warrant the
exceptional step of appellate intervention”.
DPP v TOUMNGEUN
Mr T pleaded guilty to two counts of
recklessly causing serious injury to Mr J,
the brother of his then de facto partner.
Concerned about his de facto partner’s
care of their four children and aggrieved
by her extended family’s influence and
their drinking, Mr T threw a chair at Mr
J, punched him and then hit him with
a bottle in another person’s house. Mr J
sustained serious and permanent injuries
– his right forearm was fractured and his
left forearm was lacerated to the bone,
severing a nerve and tendons.
Mr T was sentenced to 15 months’
imprisonment, wholly suspended for a
period of 18 months. The DPP appealed
against the sentence on the basis that it
was manifestly inadequate, noting that the
maximum sentence for the offence was 15
years’ imprisonment.
The Court dismissed the DPP’s appeal.
The Court found that the judge had taken
into account all relevant factors, including
the gravity of the offence and its impact
on the victim, as well as a number of
significant mitigating factors. These factors
included Mr T’s difficult upbringing as part
of a refugee family, his good work history
and lack of convictions for violent offences,
the fact that he cares for two of his children
and is a loving and responsible father, and
the long delay of three and a half years
between the offending and the imposition
of the sentence.
Justice Neave indicated her support
for the principle that the Court of Appeal
should not deny the right of a sentencing
judge to act mercifully where there
are good prospects for an offender’s
rehabilitation. She stated that, in the
particular circumstances of this case, the
judge was “entitled to show mercy” to Mr
T and that the sentence imposed upon him
should not be overturned.
DPP v SMEATON
Mr S was 31 years old, a long-term drug
user with many prior convictions for
violent offences and drug related matters,
and on parole for attempted armed
robbery when he assaulted his 23-year-old
former girlfriend in a public shopping mall.
Mr S had approached the woman and
asked her if she was there to buy heroin.
After she told him that she was not, Mr S
became abusive and aggressive, punching
the woman to the head and repeatedly
kicking her in the head after she fell to the
ground. Mr S admitted that the motive for
his attack was anger at the victim’s refusal
to assist him to “score” heroin.
While the victim’s injuries were not
as severe as might have been expected,
she sustained swelling of her brain and
received a five-centimetre cut to her face,
which was expected to leave a scar.
Mr S was sentenced to three years’
imprisonment, with a non-parole period of
20 months, for causing serious injury. The
DPP appealed the sentence, contending
that the objective seriousness of the
offending, the effect of the offence on
the victim, and the need for deterrence,
denunciation and community protection,
warranted a significantly greater sentence.
The Court canvassed the issues involved
in the matter, including the long-term
drug-based relationship between Mr S
and his former girlfriend, as well as Mr S’s
willingness to plead guilty at an early stage
and his background of deprivation and
disadvantage. While Justice Nettle noted
that “the judge in this case was faced with a
difficult sentencing task”, he concluded that
the sentence was manifestly inadequate.
Justice Nettle’s view was that the sentence
“would shock the public conscience”, given
the nature and gravity of the offence and
the extent of Mr S’s criminal history.
entities, but warned that any person who with knowledge of the
orders sought deliberately to frustrate their effect could be liable for
a contempt of court.
On 31 March 2008, Mr G, was found guilty of the murder
of Lewis Moran. This meant that the orders made by Justice
Betty King and the Court of Appeal prohibiting the publication
of Underbelly in Victoria ceased to have effect. However, due to
there being a number of criminal proceedings pending in Victoria
that could be adversely affected if ‘Underbelly’ was shown, the
DPP continued to caution members of the public and commercial
organisations from deliberately publishing any part of the program
in Victoria.
9
Justice Dodds-Streeton commented
that “violence, and in particular violence
by men against women as a means of
control in current relationships or in
relationships which have ended, is a
prevalent and even critical social evil”.
In her view, the sentence failed to
“sufficiently express the deep abhorrence
excited by a violent and brutal physical
assault by an adult male on a slight young
woman, which is in no degree abated by
the fact of a prior relationship between
the victim and the perpetrator”.
The Court increased Mr S’s sentence to
five years’ imprisonment, with a nonparole period of three years. While stating
that the principle of double jeopardy made
it inappropriate to order the cumulation
of the total effective sentence and the
sentence imposed for the earlier rape,
the Court re-sentenced Mr P, increasing
the non-parole period in respect of all
sentences to eight years and six months.
DPP v McMASTER
The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal
by the DPP against a sentence of 12 years
and six months’ imprisonment imposed on
Mr M for the manslaughter of his partner’s
five-year-old son. The DPP appealed
against the sentence on the ground that
10 DPP Annual Report 2007/08
it was manifestly inadequate and that the
judge should have imposed a sentence of
15 years or more. The DPP also brought
the appeal to test whether sentences for
the unlawful killing of children are in line
with community expectations.
Mr M had assaulted the child on many
occasions, resulting in bruising, two
skull fractures and internal injuries. He
admitted that he had beaten the child
with a heavy strap in the weeks leading
up to his death, which coincided with
the child having a bicycle accident. Mr
M initially offered to plead guilty to
manslaughter, but that offer was rejected
and he was tried for murder before a
jury, which could not agree on a verdict.
The DPP then accepted Mr M’s renewed
offer to plead guilty to manslaughter.
Justices Ashley, Neave and Lasry found
that the sentence originally imposed was
adequate, noting that “it was not enough
for the DPP to show that the judge could
have imposed a higher sentence. It had to
be shown that the sentence he imposed
was flagrantly, shockingly, inadequate”.
The Court’s view was that the
sentence imposed on Mr M was “by
conventional standards, an extremely
heavy sentence for a manslaughter by
unlawful and dangerous act to which the
offender had pleaded guilty”. The three
judges observed that a sentence of 15
years’ imprisonment on a plea of guilty
to a manslaughter of this kind would be
“far outside past sentencing practice”.
The Court also stated that the barrier
to success in appeals of this nature is high
because it subjects the offender to a kind
of double jeopardy. The Court observed
that “the barrier is also difficult to jump
because there is no single correct sentence
in any case. Sentencing is not a simple
exercise in arithmetic, but a balancing out
of considerations.”
CELEBRATING 25 YEARS OF
SERVICE TO THE VICTORIAN COMMUNITY
•
In 1983, Victoria became the first
jurisdiction in Australia to establish
a Director of Public Prosecutions,
following the enactment of the Director of
Public Prosecutions Act 1982 by the Cain
Government.
The creation of an independent
prosecuting service in Victoria is
recognised as one of the most significant
improvements made to Australia’s criminal
justice system, with the Commonwealth
and all other states and territories
subsequently following Victoria’s
leadership and establishing statutorily
appointed Directors of Public Prosecutions.
Victoria’s first DPP, John Harber
Phillips QC (later Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court) took up his appointment
in February 1983 and served as DPP until
November 1984. He was followed over the
next 25 years by John Coldrey QC, Bernard
Bongiorno QC, Geoff Flatman QC, Paul
Coghlan QC and Jeremy Rapke QC.
Over the years, the DPP’s resources
and workload have increased dramatically.
When John Harber Phillips QC took up his
appointment in 1983, he had only a few
legal officers. Today, Jeremy Rapke QC is
supported by 25 Crown Prosecutors and
around 280 staff employed by the Office
of Public Prosecutions. The budget for the
DPP’s first year of operation was a little
over $5.5 million, compared with today’s
annual budget of around $50 million. In
1984, the total number of briefs prepared
and hearings attended by the DPP’s office
was around 6,000. In 2007/08, the OPP
prepared over 37,000 briefs and attended
around 35,000 hearings.
The nature of prosecutions in Victoria
has also changed over the last 25 years.
Modern prosecutors now need to be
familiar with other branches of the law,
such as commercial law and family law.
New areas of prosecution work have
emerged, including computer crime
and confiscation of the proceeds of
crime. Prosecutors are now much more
supportive of victims and witnesses; they
need to understand developments in
forensic science; and they must be familiar
with the use of technology in acquiring
and presenting evidence. Victoria’s public
prosecution service now also engages
closely with other agencies working in
the criminal justice system and actively
participates in law reform and legal policy
changes. Prosecution services have also
extended into regional Victoria.
While the nature and scale of the DPP’s
operations has changed, the fundamental
principle behind the work of the office
remains the same: that the conduct of
prosecutions should be independent of the
government of the day.
In 2008, the DPP and the OPP will
celebrate 25 years of fair, independent
and impartial service to the Victorian
community with a number of events and
activities, including a Gala Dinner with
DPPs from around Australia, a function for
OPP staff and “The Pursuit of Justice”, a 25th
anniversary commemorative publication.
JOHN HARBER PHILLIPS QC
1 February 1983 – 6 November 1984
JOHN COLDREY QC
7 November 1984 – 18 February 1991
BERNARD BONGIORNO QC
19 February 1991 – 3 November 1994
GEOFFREY FLATMAN QC
21 February 1995 – 18 July 2001
PAUL COGHLAN QC
9 October 2001 – 7 August 2007
JEREMY RAPKE QC
7 November 2007 – Present
11
VICTORIA’S CROWN PROSECUTORS
A NEW ERA BEGINS
•
In 2007/08, Victoria’s Crown
Prosecutors entered a new era with
the departure of former Chief Crown
Prosecutor, Mr Jeremy Rapke QC, to
become Director of Public Prosecutions
and the appointment of Mr Gavin Silbert
SC (top right) as his replacement. Several
new prosecutors also joined Crown
Prosecutors’ Chambers from interstate
and the private Bar.
Announcing the appointment of Mr
Silbert as Victoria’s new Chief Crown
Prosecutor in March 2008, AttorneyGeneral Rob Hulls noted that his
“skills, talent and experience make him
an outstanding appointment as Chief
Crown Prosecutor”. Mr Silbert brings
more than 30 years’ experience as a
barrister to his new position, including
extensive criminal law experience as a
Crown Prosecutor and in private practice.
He has prosecuted many high-profile
cases, including Supreme Court murder
trials, and has considerable appellate
experience before the Court of Appeal
and as a junior before the High Court of
Australia. Mr Silbert also has experience
in administrative and commercial law,
including appearing before the Cole
Commission Inquiry into the UN Oil For
Food Program.
Throughout 2007/08, Victoria’s Crown
Prosecutors continued to deliver a high
standard of service to the community
– a standard that Mr Silbert is keen to
maintain. “Victoria is pre-eminent in
prosecutorial standards,” he says. “We
will continue to set the benchmarks for
others to follow and we will continue
to provide an educative service in
prosecutions practice that extends across
the Pacific region.”
The workload of prosecutors remains
high. In 2007/08, Crown Prosecutors
completed more than 3,000 presentments
and provided over 5,000 advisings,
including over 1,200 advisings in relation
to plea offers.
During the year, Crown Prosecutors
conducted a number of major
prosecutions, including high-profile
organised crime and police corruption
trials, large-scale commercial fraud and
significant homicide cases. Mr Silbert says
that the practice of running large, complex
and high-profile cases out of Crown
Prosecutors’ Chambers will continue.
“We have built a strong reputation in
prosecuting these cases successfully,” he
notes. ”We intend to continue to develop
our expertise and experience in these
major cases – backed by the hard work and
support provided by the OPP’s solicitors.”
The OPP also introduced a new
process for allocating more complex
cases to Crown Prosecutors within
the office – a process that is more
streamlined, reduces risk and ensures
that cases are matched to prosecutors
with relevant expertise and experience.
Two areas of prosecutions that grew
rapidly in 2007/08 were occupational
health and safety, and confiscation of the
proceeds of crime. As the Senior Crown
Prosecutor involved in these expanding
areas, Mr Peter Rose SC says that they
“reflect the changing role of Crown
Prosecutors in that they are essentially civil
matters, not criminal matters”. Mr Rose
points out that with prosecutions practice
now on the cutting edge of these emerging
and growing areas, there is an increasing
need to recruit Crown Prosecutors with
civil and commercial law backgrounds.
In 2008, Melbourne hosted the annual
conference of the Australian Association
of Crown Prosecutors. Bringing together
prosecutors from around Australia,
New Zealand and the Pacific region, the
conference addressed legal and practical
issues of relevance to modern prosecutorial
practice. Topics covered by the conference
included innovations in the criminal
law, human rights in an age of terrorism,
sentencing and juror satisfaction. Hosting
the conference in Melbourne enabled
Victoria’s Crown Prosecutors to highlight
their achievements. In particular, DPP
Jeremy Rapke QC led a major session on
the use of technology in the courtroom,
supported by Crown Prosecutor Chris
Beale and Rod Hume and Robert Iurato
from the OPP’s audio-visual unit.
Looking ahead, Mr Silbert will oversee a
review of Prosecutors’ Chambers to ensure
that the heavy workloads of the Crown
Prosecutors are managed effectively
and efficiently. In line with the DPP’s
commitment to reducing delays in the
courts, Crown Prosecutors will continue to
adopt a strong focus on resolving matters
in a timely manner and contributing to
early resolution initiatives undertaken
by the OPP. Crown Prosecutors will also
be closely involved in improving the
responsiveness of the criminal justice
system to victims and witnesses of serious
crimes. Further challenges are likely to
arise for prosecutors in relation to the
implementation of the Charter of Human
Rights and Responsibilities.
Mr Silbert is confident that Victoria’s
Crown Prosecutors are more than capable
of meeting any challenges that may
come their way. “For many years, our
Chambers has been a leader in criminal
advocacy and prosecutions practice, and
our work over the past 12 months has
reinforced that leadership,” he says. “We
also understand that the community’s
confidence in the justice system
depends in part upon our competence,
professionalism and integrity – qualities
that will remain valued, supported and
upheld by Victoria’s Crown Prosecutors.”
CROWN PROSECUTOR ADVICE TOTAL
CROWN PROSECUTOR PRESENTMENTS TOTAL
505"-"%7*$&
505"-13&4&/5.&/54
o o o o
o o
o o o
o o o o o o
:&"3
o o o
:&"3
CROWN PROSECUTOR ADVICE RE:
PLEA OFFER TOTAL
CROWN PROSECUTOR GENERAL ADVICE TOTAL
(&/&3"-"%7*$&
"%7*$&3&1-&"0''&3
o o o o o o o o o
:&"3
o o o o
o o o o o
:&"3
13
Carmel Barbagallo
Crown Prosecutor
Carmel Barbagallo sometimes feels as if she’s doing a “tour of
duty” of prosecutions services in Australia, having worked as a
prosecutor in Queensland, Western Australia and now Victoria.
“I came to Melbourne because Victoria’s prosecutions
service has a reputation for excellence that is well-known
right across the country,” says Carmel. “In my view, it’s the
best prosecutions office in Australia, partly because it is so
specialised and partly because of the wealth of experience
and knowledge within the office.”
Since joining the office as a Crown Prosecutor in
January 2008, Carmel has found that it has lived up to
her expectations. “This is an office that continually does
challenging and demanding work,” she says. “I feel that I am
improving, learning and broadening my experience – and that
I’m doing this surrounded by good people who are skilled,
knowledgeable and passionate about what they do.”
Carmel has been highly impressed with the work of the
OPP’s solicitors. “The solicitors who instruct me are very,
very good,” she says. “I simply could not do my job without
them. It gives me a great sense of confidence that briefs are
always well put together, cover all the issues and have taken
into account the rights and concerns of victims.” Carmel also
praises the OPP’s Witness Assistance Service. “They not only
support victims and witnesses, they provide great support for
us as prosecutors,” she says.
Carmel is enthusiastic about her future as a prosecutor. “I’m
very comfortable representing the community and I enjoy the
responsibility of being firm, but fair, in prosecuting,” she says.
“I want to continue to do challenging work – by that, I don’t
mean high-profile cases, but work that is going to tax me.
“The fact is that I just love this job. It’s challenging, exciting
and rewarding. What more could you ask for?”
ANNUAL REPORT OF
THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
15
MESSAGE FROM THE
SOLICITOR FOR PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
STUART WARD
In prosecuting the most serious criminal
•offences
in Victoria on behalf of the Director
of Public Prosecutions, the Office of Public
Prosecutions is of vital importance to the
confidence, security and good governance
of the Victorian community.
Prosecuting serious crime is hard
work. The cases are difficult and
demanding, with increasing complexity
and size, and an unrelenting volume.
They often involve human tragedies
that are emotionally draining. Our
work is conducted under pressure
and scrutiny – from those involved in
the cases, from the courts and from
defence legal practitioners – and under
the spotlight of the media, which often
reports our work as leading news items.
The law is constantly changing, and we
must capture, analyse and apply those
changes. Our commitment to supporting
victims of crime has been absorbed
into our practice. We operate on a tight
resource base.
Underlining all of this, we strive for fair
and just outcomes; we are conscious of the
importance of maintaining an independent
prosecution service; and our objective
is to handle every case to the highest
professional standards.
That we meet the daily challenges of
our work is a tribute to the talented and
loyal staff who have chosen to work at
the OPP. This Annual Report reflects
their dedication and it is fitting that
the Report profiles some staff, while
emphasising the importance of all our
staff to our collective performance.
The OPP has built a strong reputation
over many years. Our challenge and aim
is to continue to improve our standing
and to be recognised as a centre of
excellence and leadership – within the
legal and broader community, throughout
Australia and internationally.
Responding to this challenge, we are
16 OPP Annual Report 2007/08
building a modern, dynamic, specialist
legal practice. The program to achieve this
is extensive, involving structural reform
and remodelling business and governance
processes. The new business model is
based on a case management approach
with cases allocated to solicitors from the
earliest possible stage in the court cycle.
This not only promotes early resolution,
it provides continuity for victims and
witnesses, police and defence practitioners.
Centrally managed file allocation also
allows flexibility within Directorates
to respond to changing demands and
pressures, as well as providing a greater
variety of work to solicitors.
In 2007/08 we commenced, and indeed
went a long way towards completing, the
implementation of a new legal practice
structure, incorporating seven Directorates
and the Higher Court Appeals Unit.
Significantly, one of the Directorates is that
of Victims Strategy and Services, elevating
the status of victim support services within
the Office. Other specialist Directorates
include Proceeds of Crime and the
Specialist Sex Offences Unit.
Eleven areas of legal specialisation have
also been created. The specialties include
“staple” areas such as drugs, sex offences,
fraud, and homicide, as well as emerging
areas such as early resolution and
advocacy, mental impairment, organised
crime, proceeds of crime, and external
agencies (including WorkCover and
environmental protection). A specialty for
“Circuit” has been created to recognise the
different needs in prosecuting matters in
regional Victoria compared to Melbourne.
As with any major reform program, at
times it has been testing and unsettling.
However, with the end in sight, it is exciting to see the opportunities and benefits
that are flowing. I acknowledge the
patience and support of staff during the
development and implementation of these
changes, and I thank them for their input.
The new arrangements seek to
improve opportunities for staff at the
OPP. Solicitors will have the option of
pursuing careers focused on management,
legal specialty and/or advocacy, with
the capacity to move between the three
areas. For the administrative staff
who so ably support the legal practice,
a new administrative model is being
developed. It is important that we provide
an environment that acknowledges,
stimulates and challenges staff, so that we
can continue to attract and retain people of
the highest calibre in a competitive market.
We also continue to expand our
practice in areas such as confiscation
of the proceeds of crime and serious
occupational health and safety offences.
Both areas demand new skills and fresh
approaches for prosecutors. Twelve
months after establishing the Specialist
Sex Offences Unit, it is clear that our
pioneering approach to prosecuting
serious sex offence cases is proving highly
successful. We are achieving strong
results with a high level of guilty pleas
in these cases that have been historically
difficult, reducing the need for victims to
give evidence in court and avoiding the
associated trauma and distress.
In 2007/08 a new fee structure and
Service Level Charter for the private Bar
was introduced. With new contracts and
business rules for the engagement of
private counsel, we will be able to more
effectively monitor and manage our
briefing expenditure, which now accounts
for approximately one-quarter of the
OPP’s annual budget. The creation of a
new Counsel Advisory Group ensures that
Crown Prosecutors are matched with the
most complex and risky cases, deserving of
their expertise and experience.
A Legal Practice Manager has been
recruited to oversee the practice. Working
cooperatively with the General Manager
of Corporate Services, the Legal Practice
Manager will provide executive support
to the Solicitor for Public Prosecutions.
The appointment of Michael Hoyle to the
position of General Manager for Corporate
Services is an important bridge between
the two streams, as he has previously
worked as a senior solicitor at the OPP.
Much of our effort during the year was
focused on the organisational review, but
improvements in a number of keys areas
were made which are critical to our objective
of a modern legal practice. These included:
• a strong focus on management
of workloads, improving work
environments and enhancing employee
health and safety
• a new Learning and Development
program for staff, which is an important
adjunct to new business processes and
expectations of staff
• appointing the OPP’s first Senior
Communications Advisor to deal with
media enquiries and enhance our
external communications
• developing a data and analytical capacity
to manage what has become a complex
legal practice, where our capacity to
identify trends, allocate and prioritise
resources, and understand the broader
influences on our work is critical to
improving and gaining efficiencies - and
supporting future funding bids.
We could not have achieved our success
without the cooperation of many other
criminal justice agencies. I thank those who
worked in partnership with us in 2007/08,
especially the courts, Victoria Police and the
Department of Justice. We will continue to
work with other agencies to ensure that the
criminal justice system is operating in a fair,
effective, and efficient manner.
Finally and importantly, I want to
acknowledge Angela Cannon, who left
the OPP in May 2008 after serving as
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions for two
years. Angela’s vision for a 21st century
prosecution practice and her commitment
to turning that vision into reality has left
the OPP with a great and enduring legacy.
STUART WARD
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Acting)
17
Angela Cannon
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
July 2006 to May 2008
Angela Cannon was appointed Victoria’s Solicitor for Public
Prosecutions in July 2006..
Prior to joining the OPP, Angela worked in the Department
of Justice, initially as Senior Criminal Law Officer and later
as Director, Legal Policy and Court Services. During her time
with the Department, Angela worked on a number of special
projects, including the Attorney-General’s Justice Vision
Statement, the Pathways to Justice Sentencing Review, the
creation of Victoria’s first Drug Court and initiatives under the
Victorian Aboriginal Justice Agreement.
In her two years as Solicitor for Public Prosecutions, Angela
commissioned a major organisational review of the OPP
and commenced an extensive reorganisation of the Office’s
legal practice. She believed that the OPP needed to make
substantial changes to its structure, processes and systems
to meet the changing and growing demands on prosecutors.
She noted in the OPP’s 2006/07 Annual Report that change
was needed “to take the OPP forward as a dynamic, high
performing and modern legal practice capable of delivering a
21st century prosecutions service”.
Angela recognised that the OPP’s corporate governance
and administrative functions also needed strengthening in
an era where greater accountability and professionalism is
required from public agencies. She also saw this strengthening
as critical to providing higher levels of support to the OPP’s
solicitors and Crown Prosecutors, improving the employment
conditions, health and safety of staff, and opening up more
rewarding careers in prosecutions.
Angela also believed that the OPP should be more actively
engaged in broader legal policy and practice issues, using the
expertise and experience of its staff – as well as the extensive
data and knowledge accumulated by the Office – to explore
new approaches to prosecuting and play a leading role in
improving the operations of the criminal justice system.
On her departure from the OPP, Victoria’s Director for
Public Prosecutions, Jeremy Rapke QC, listed Angela’s many
achievements: “She has brought a level of fiscal responsibility
to the OPP that is the envy of many statutory bodies. She has
been successful in securing unprecedented levels of funding
from the government for the Office.”
“She has been in the forefront of introducing statewide
initiatives aimed at reducing delays in the criminal justice
system. She has commenced the process of setting up this
office’s first permanent regional centre and has secured
funding for that project. She has driven important changes
in how we handle sexual offences and treat victims of crime
and vulnerable witnesses. She has been actively involved in
a number of major law reform issues, all of which touch the
work that we do.
“She has forged and cultivated valuable relationships
and partnerships with heads of jurisdictions and outside
agencies. And she has enhanced the reputation of this
office throughout Australia.”
In May 2008, Angela resigned from her position to spend
more time with her young family. Her vision, leadership and
drive have laid down a strong foundation for the future. Her
commitment to equipping Victoria’s prosecution service for the
challenges ahead will continue to be valued and appreciated
by the OPP for many years to come.
WHAT WE DO
In prosecuting serious crimes on behalf
•of the
Director of Public Prosecutions,
the OPP provides a number of important
services to the Victorian community:
WE DELIVER A HIGH QUALITY
PROSECUTION SERVICE
The OPP prosecutes all serious crimes in
Victoria, including homicides, serious sex
offences, drug trafficking, serious assaults,
armed robberies, workplace deaths, serious
driving offences and major frauds. We also
prosecute cases involving organised crime
and police corruption.
We aim to provide a high quality
prosecution service, recognising that such
a service is essential to bringing offenders
to justice, reducing crime and maintaining
public confidence in the criminal justice
system. We also aim to reduce delays in
the system.
In delivering our prosecution service,
the OPP works collaboratively with
other organisations that form part of the
criminal justice system, including Victoria
Police, the Office of Police Integrity,
Corrections Victoria, Victoria Legal Aid,
the courts, victim assistance groups, and
solicitors and barristers.
WE SERVE REGIONAL VICTORIA
The OPP prosecutes matters whenever
the Supreme Court and County Court
conducts hearings in regional Victoria.
Our Circuit Section prepares cases for
prosecution, briefs barristers to appear in
court and travels to the regional centres
of Geelong, Ballarat, Bendigo, Horsham,
Warrnambool, Mildura, Morwell,
Bairnsdale, Sale, Shepparton, Wangaratta
and Wodonga for hearings.
The Circuit Section also liaises with and
provides advice to other agencies such as
Victoria Police and the Victorian Court
Network and undertakes community
education in regional Victoria for local
communities and agencies involved in the
justice system.
WE SUPPORT VICTIMS AND
WITNESSES OF CRIME
The OPP provides support for victims and
witnesses of serious crime as part of its
prosecution service.
Our Witness Assistance Service (WAS)
assists victims and witnesses by providing
information about court procedures,
running pre-court conferences to explain
how the courts operate and the process
involved in giving evidence, conducting
courtroom tours and supporting victims
and witnesses in court.
WAS also provides post-hearing
de-briefings to support victims who are
traumatised by giving evidence or who
are unhappy with the outcome of cases.
In addition, WAS produces educational
material and provides advice and training
for community groups and Victoria Police.
WE INFLUENCE LEGAL POLICY AND
LAW REFORM
The OPP identifies and undertakes
activities designed to improve and
modernise the law, the operation of
the criminal justice system and the
prosecution process.
We work with Victoria Police, the
Department of Justice, the courts, the
legal profession and community groups
to identify and respond to significant law
reform issues. We also play an influential
role in the development of legal policy and
practice in Victoria by providing advice to
the Victorian Government, supporting the
implementation of new legislation and
participating in law reform activities.
THE OPP’S MISSION IS TO:
• CONDUCT A HIGH QUALITY, EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT
PROSECUTION SERVICE AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF
VICTORIA’S CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
• ENSURE THAT OUR SERVICE MEETS COMMUNITY EXPECTATIONS OF
FAIRNESS, IMPARTIALITY AND INDEPENDENCE IN APPLYING THE LAW
• INSPIRE PUBLIC TRUST AND CONFIDENCE IN VICTORIA’S PUBLIC
PROSECUTION SERVICE AND IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.
19
OUR PEOPLE
30 June 2008, around 280 people
•wereAtemployed
by the OPP. In addition,
25 Crown Prosecutors were employed
as in-house counsel, comprising eight
Senior Crown Prosecutors and 17 Crown
Prosecutors. Nine recent law graduates
were undertaking the Articled
Clerkship Program.
The majority of the OPP’s staff are
involved in the conduct of prosecutions.
Other legal staff work in appeals or in
policy and advice. Staff who are not
directly involved in legal functions provide
victim and witness support, legal support
(such as registry, briefing, audio visual and
library services) or corporate services (such
as project management, performance
monitoring, human resources, financial
and facilities management and staff
development and training). These services
are overseen by the General Manager
Corporate Services.
OUR PROGRAM FOR
ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE
In 2006/07, the OPP commenced a multiyear organisational change program, which
aims to position the OPP to better respond
to the changing needs and challenges of
the criminal justice system. The program’s
scope is extensive and touches all areas
of the OPP’s corporate services and legal
practice. Further details of the program are
set out on pages 53 – 60 of this report.
OUR LEADERSHIP TEAM AT 30 JUNE 2008
Jeremy Rapke QC
Director of Public
Prosecutions
Stuart Ward
Solicitor for Public
Prosecutions (Acting)
Gavin Silbert SC
Chief Crown Prosecutor
Suzette Dootjes
Legal Practice Manager
(Acting)
Michael Hoyle
General Manager
Corporate Services
Jeremy Rapke QC was
appointed Victoria’s
Director for Public
Prosecutions in November
2007. Before becoming
DPP, Mr Rapke served
as Victoria’s Chief Crown
Prosecutor for two years
and was a Senior Crown
Prosecutor from 1995
to 2005. Mr Rapke has
practised law for 36 years
and was appointed a
Queen’s Counsel in 1999.
Stuart Ward was appointed
Acting Solicitor for Public
Prosecutions in June 2008.
Mr Ward worked at the
OPP from 1987 until 1997,
at which time he was the
Manager of the Commercial
Crime Group. He returned
to the OPP as Legal Practice
Manager in late 2007 after
an absence of 10 years,
during which he managed
the legal and investigative
functions at the Office
of Fair Trading and
Business Affairs, and held
appointments as Deputy
Chairperson of the Business
Licensing Authority,
Chairperson of the Motor
Car Traders Guarantee
Fund Claims Committee
and Acting Director of
Liquor Licensing.
Gavin Silbert SC was
appointed Victoria’s Chief
Crown Prosecutor in
March 2008. Mr Silbert
has more than 30 years
experience as a barrister in
all jurisdictions, including
the High Court and Court
of Appeal. Prior to his
appointment,
Mr Silbert worked in
private practice with a focus
on criminal law. He was
appointed a Senior Counsel
in 2007.
Suzette Dootjes joined
the OPP in 1986. She has
worked in a variety of
positions within the OPP’s
legal practice, most recently
as a Program Manager,
Eastern Region, Circuit
Section. Ms Dootjes has a
Bachelor of Laws (Hons)
and a Master of Laws.
Michael Hoyle was
appointed General Manager
Corporate Services in May
2008. Michael has worked
in the legal practice of the
OPP as a Principal Solicitor
(Proceeds of Crime, General
Prosecutions and the
Corruption and Specialist
Prosecutions Unit). Before
joining the OPP in August
2004, Michael was a partner
of the commercial law firm
DLA Phillips Fox.
Bruce Gardner
Directorate Manager
Policy and Advice
After 26 years working with the OPP, there’s not much Bruce
Gardner doesn’t know about prosecuting. Talk to anyone in
the office and they will mention Bruce (the OPP’s only Grade
7 Senior Technical Specialist) as a valued, respected and
approachable source of advice and guidance in their work
as prosecutors. The OPP’s legal database is even known as
‘Brucebase’, reflecting Bruce’s role in creating and maintaining
the comprehensive system – but also as a tribute to his
encyclopedic knowledge about prosecutions in Victoria.
Bruce’s career with the OPP has spanned most aspects
of prosecutions, including a stint working on County Court
matters, a ten-year period as Assistant to the Solicitor for
Public Prosecutions (then John Buckley), heading up the Policy
Advisings and Court of Appeal Unit for fourteen years, and now
manager of the new Policy and Advice Directorate.
He continues to enjoy working at the OPP because every
day brings something new. “There is a multitude of legal and
procedural issues that arise pretty much on a daily basis,”
he says. “Much of it is cutting edge in the sense of it being
something that is new to this office, new to prosecutions or
new to the criminal justice system. Essentially, we help to
develop new and emerging areas of jurisprudence – and that’s
not something many legal practitioners can say.”
Bruce also assists solicitors in the OPP deal with legal
issues that arise in their cases. “A lot of unusual problems
come up in the OPP’s practice,” notes Bruce. “We provide
any advice, support and direction our prosecutors might need
to work through those problems. We also keep an eye on
how these issues affect prosecuting and criminal law more
generally, as well as their impact on the overall court system.”
Bruce is also responsible for managing a large number
of Director’s Policies (which regulate most areas of legal
operations within the OPP). “Policy work is very dynamic,” he
says. “We are constantly writing or updating policies to keep
pace with amendments and reforms. It’s very satisfying to
provide material to the staff that will help them to apply the law
consistently and effectively.”
The broader, systemic side of Bruce’s work involves liaising
and consulting with external agencies, such as Victoria Police,
the Department of Justice, the Victorian Government Solicitor’s
Office, the Law institute of Victoria and others. “At any given
time, we will be engaged in a wide range of activities covering
the full spectrum of criminal law in Victoria – from reviewing
legislation and proposing reforms to the law through to
providing advice to various inquiries and overseeing new court
processes,“ he says.
“It’s a very diverse and constantly changing mix of issues
and activities – and it’s why I continue to find the OPP a very
interesting and rewarding place to work.”
21
THE OPP’S LEGAL PRACTICE AND
ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE
Prior to 2008, the OPP’s prosecutorial
•functions
were structured around 20
sections and units. Currently, as part of
the office’s major organisational change
program, the OPP’s legal practice is being
reorganised around seven directorates, a
Higher Court Appeals Unit and specialist
legal practitioners.
DIRECTORATE A
COMPLEX CRIME
This Directorate prosecutes complex/high
risk matters. It covers organised crime,
police corruption, major drug cases and
complex commercial crime.
DIRECTORATE B
PRINCIPAL PROSECUTIONS
The Principal Prosecutions Directorate
prosecutes a wide range of indictable
criminal matters in the County and
Supreme Courts, including homicides,
serious assaults, serious driving offences
and cases involving mentally impaired
defendants. The Directorate assists the
Coroner in various matters and conducts
prosecutions on behalf of external
agencies, such as WorkSafe, Corrections
Victoria and government departments.
DIRECTORATE C
SPECIALIST SEX OFFENCES UNIT
This Directorate is responsible for
prosecuting all serious sex offences
in Melbourne and for overseeing and
advising on the prosecution of these
offences in regional Victoria. The Specialist
Sex Offences Unit adopts an innovative,
specialised approach to prosecuting these
offences, bringing together solicitors and
advocates with expertise in serious sex
crime cases.
DIRECTORATE D
BRIEFING SERVICES AND APPEALS
This Directorate manages the internal
and external briefing operations of the
OPP, including all aspects of the office’s
relationship with the private Bar. It
supports the Counsel Advisory Group,
which matches complex cases with
prosecutors based on their expertise and
experience. The Directorate includes the
County Court Appeals Section (which
conducts and responds to appeals against
sentencing and conviction orders in the
Magistrates’ Court) and the Bail and
Breaches Section (which responds on
behalf of the DPP to applications for bail
in the Supreme Court and the Court of
Appeal, and brings breaches of noncustodial orders back before the Supreme
and County Courts).
Vacant
ACTING Stuart Ward
Bruce Gardner
Directorate Manager
F Policy and Advice
OFFICE STRUCTURE
Office of the Solicitor
Brett Sonnet
Manager
Higher Court Appeals
Stuart Ward
ACTING Suzette Dootjes
Michael Hoyle
General Manager
Corporate Services
Jennifer Chamberlin
Manager
Transition Unit
Vaille Anscombe
Directorate Manager
A Complex Crime
Vacant
Finance Manager
ACTING Eddie Chew
Projects & Performance
Catherine Nicols
Sam Jones
Stephen Bird
Directorate Manager
B Principal Prosecutions
Sam Kenny
Manager
Human Resources
Adriaan Bendeler
Library Manager
Helen Fatouros
Directorate Manager
C Special Sex Offences Unit
Zeljko Matijevic
Manager
Information Technology Services
Rod Hume
Manager
Audio Visual
Rod Gray
Directorate Manager
D Briefing Services & Appeals
Andrew Sutherland
Manager
Facilities
Carl Barbaro
Manager
Registry
David Gray
Directorate Manager
E Proceeds of Crime
Charlene Micallef
Directorate Manager
G Victims Strategy & Services
DIRECTORATE E
PROCEEDS OF CRIME
The Proceeds of Crime Directorate
brings applications under the Confiscation
Act 1997, which provides a scheme for
confiscating assets that have been used in
the commission of a crime or purchased
with the proceeds of crime.
DIRECTORATE F
POLICY AND ADVICE
The Policy and Advice Directorate
provides leadership on legislation and legal
policy matters relating to prosecutions.
It conducts research into – and provides
advice on – matters affecting the policy,
practices and work of the DPP and
the OPP, as well as responding to and
participating in law reform activities. The
directorate also provides advice to external
agencies. It reports directly to the Solicitor
for Public Prosecutions.
DIRECTORATE G
VICTIMS STRATEGY AND SERVICES
This Directorate builds on the work of
the OPP’s Witness Assistance Service
and provides information and support to
victims and witnesses of serious crimes. The
Directorate also develops and participates in
strategies and activities designed to improve
the responsiveness of the criminal justice
system to victims and witnesses.
HIGHER COURT APPEALS UNIT
This unit is responsible for preparing and
instructing in appeals against conviction
and sentence by convicted persons,
appeals against sentence by the DPP to
the Court of Appeal and appeals to the
High Court.
LEGAL PROSECUTION SPECIALISTS
At 30 June 2008, the OPP had appointed
11 Legal Prosecution Specialists covering
the areas of organised crime, corruption,
drugs, commercial crime, homicide and
coronial, sex crime, proceeds of crime,
early resolution and advocacy, external
agencies, mental impairment and circuit
operations. These senior prosecutors use
their expertise and experience to manage
and oversee complex prosecutions, mentor
other solicitors, implement new legislation
and policy, and enhance the OPP’s
leadership and reputation in their areas of
speciality.
LEGAL PRACTICE STRUCTURE
Vacant
ACTING Stuart Ward
Office of the Solicitor
Stuart Ward
ACTING Suzette Dootjes
Vaille Anscombe
Directorate Manager
A Complex Crime
Stephen Bird
Directorate Manager
B Principal
Prosecutions
Helen Fatouros
Directorate Manager
C Special Sex
Offences Unit
Rod Gray
Directorate Manager
D Briefing Services &
Appeals
Gary Ching
Legal Prosecution
Specialist
Special Sex
Offences Unit
Peter Atkinson
Manager
Bail & Breaches
Jack Vandersteen
Legal Prosecution
Specialist
Advocacy
Early Resolution
Suzette Dootjes
Legal Prosecution
Specialist
Circuit Operations
Irene McGregor
Legal Prosecution
Specialist
Corruption
Robert Siracusa
Legal Prosecution
Specialist
External Agencies
Michael Knight
Manager
County Court Appeals
Lucia Palgan
Legal Prosecution
Specialist
Drugs
Richard Lewis
Legal Prosecution
Specialist
Homicide & Coronial
Inquests
Adriana Civitella
Manager
Briefing Services
Vicki Prapas
Legal Prosecution
Specialist
Organised Crime
Julie Carpenter
Louise Wilkinson
Legal Prosecution
Specialists
Mental Impairment
Bruce Gardner
Directorate Manager
F Policy and Advice
Brett Sonnet
Manager
David Gray
Directorate Manager
E Proceeds of Crime
Damian Martin
Legal Prosecution
Specialist
Proceeds of Crime
Charlene Micallef
Directorate Manager
G Victims Strategy &
Services
Anne O’Brien
Victims Specialist
Joan VanStaveren
Legal Prosecution
Specialist
Commercial Crime/Fraud
23
Susie Gray, Anthony McQuire, Kristie Churchill
Articled Clerks
Since 1998, the Office of Public Prosecutions has offered an
Articled Clerkship Program to law graduates. The 12-month
program gives graduates experience in a range of legal practice
areas before they are admitted to practice as a barrister and
solicitor by the Supreme Court of Victoria. During the program,
articled clerks are rotated through the various sections of the
office, gaining experience in managing cases, preparing legal
advice, instructing Crown Prosecutors and outside counsel,
and appearing in courts and tribunals. Clerks are also given the
opportunity to work at relevant external agencies, such as the
Victorian Government Solicitor’s Office.
This year, the OPP selected nine graduates from around 150
applicants for the Articled Clerkship Program. Commencing
in March 2008, each articled clerk will rotate through at least
four sections of the OPP, enabling them to undertake a variety
of prosecutions work, become familiar with legal processes
and procedures, and gain a working knowledge of how the
OPP operates and the matters it prosecutes. It’s a diverse and
comprehensive syllabus – and a steep learning curve for all
graduates accepted into the program.
The youngest of this year’s clerks, 22-year-old Susie Gray
(top right), graduated from Victoria University last year. She
says that “almost every day a new challenge comes up, there
are new areas of the law to be learnt or legislative changes to
be monitored – sometimes it can be a bit daunting”. But Susie
says that senior solicitors in the office are very supportive of the
articled clerks. “There is a wealth of knowledge here to tap into,”
she says. “The other articled clerks have also been fantastic. It
is a very warm and friendly workplace where you can grow and
develop.” Susie is presently on her first rotation in the Policy
and Advice Directorate and is working on a plea file: talking to
victims, preparing restitution orders, and instructing barristers in
the County Court. She has also been involved in providing legal
advice to Victoria Police and the Department of Justice.
Susie sees her future as being in prosecuting. “I like the
hands-on nature of prosecuting in court, dealing with various
people from different backgrounds and learning about the many
sides of the criminal justice system,” she says. “Way, way into
the future I could possibly aim at being a Crown Prosecutor
– you never know.”
While also graduating in 2007, Anthony McQuire’s journey
to the OPP has followed an interesting path. He has played
professional cricket at the highest level (including playing in the
NSW and Victorian squads and the Prime Minister’s XI against
the West Indies), worked in criminal law firms in Sydney and
London, been a dispute resolutions officer with a number of
workers’ compensation insurance firms and worked for a year in
a small family law firm in Melbourne. “It was rewarding working
in family law, but it also clarified for me that I wanted to work in
criminal law, focusing on the prosecution side,” says Anthony.
“In my view, we all owe a duty to society and the work that we
do in prosecutions often has flow-on benefits for the community
– and that is important to me.”
Anthony is about to complete his first rotation at the Specialist
Sex Offences Unit and will soon transfer to another section of
the OPP. “The senior solicitors in this unit have been incredibly
helpful to me and very generous in sharing their extensive legal
knowledge,” he says. “I am thoroughly enjoying working here
– the OPP has provided me with a fantastic opportunity to
build a career in an area of law that I am very interested in and
committed to.”
At 29, Kristie Churchill (top left) seems to have acquired a
lifetime’s worth of work experience even before applying for
articles at the OPP. She has managed a drug and alcohol facility
for offenders in Frankston, worked for Adult Corrections doing
prosecutions of community-based dispositions and supervised
adult offenders on parole. She also worked in juvenile justice,
advising the Children’s Court on sentencing options for young
offenders. Along the way, she completed a Criminology degree
and – earlier this year – her Law degree. “I do like continual
challenges and learning new things,” says Kristie, ”and there are
certainly many new things to learn doing articles with the OPP.
Already, the diversity of work has exposed me to interesting and
complex cases, such as the homicide advice file I am presently
working on.”
Susie, Anthony and Kristie also value the support the articled
clerks provide to each other. “Everyone in this year’s group
has been tremendously helpful to each other,” says Susie.
“We all look out for each other and see each other socially on
a regular basis.” Adds Anthony: “The program is as full-on as
it is interesting, so it is a bonus to be doing it with such a great
bunch of people.”
For the moment, they are all focused on learning as much
as they can and completing the program. Looking to the future,
they all express a keen wish to stay at the OPP. “Coming to the
OPP was a natural progression for me,” says Kristie. “I have
been interested in prosecuting for a long time now and am
committed to working in the area in the future.” Anthony agrees:
“I am really interested in helping people and in issues of social
and legal justice. So yes, I would be very interested in continuing
to work at the OPP when I finish the course – it is a great place
to work.”
DELIVERING A HIGH QUALITY,
EFFECTIVE PROSECUTION SERVICE
•continues
to deliver a high quality
prosecution service to the Victorian
community, with the OPP securing a high
rate of guilty pleas and trial convictions in
2007/08. The number of briefs prepared
and hearings attended by OPP staff
increased to more than 72,000 – reflecting
the high volume of prosecutorial work
conducted by the office and the vitally
important part the OPP plays in Victoria’s
criminal justice system.
In 2007/08, the OPP prepared more
than 37,000 briefs and attended around
35,000 hearings. Matters in which the OPP
was involved included organised crime and
police corruption, high profile homicides,
serious sex offences, drug trafficking
and drug syndicates, commercial fraud,
workplace deaths and injuries, serious
driving offences, armed robbery and
serious assaults. The OPP also maintained
its groundbreaking work in confiscating
assets obtained through crime.
Findings of guilt (guilty pleas and
convictions) were obtained in 86.3 per cent
BRIEFS PREPARED AND HEARINGS ATTENDED
of all cases completed in 2007/08 – a slight
decrease from the eight-year high recorded
last year, but remaining above the eightyear average. Guilty pleas were obtained
in 69.8 per cent of cases completed in
2007/08, remaining above the OPP’s target
of 68 per cent. These outcomes reflect
the commitment of the OPP and Victoria
Police to pursue the prosecution of serious
crimes to successful conclusions, as well as
the success of the OPP’s focus on resolving
matters at an early stage.
GUILTY PLEAS AS A PERCENTAGE
OF CASES COMPLETED
(6*-5:1-&"4
#3*&'413&1"3&%
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
:&"3
:&"3
FINDINGS OF GUILT, ACQUITTALS AND OTHER OUTCOMES OF CASES COMPLETED
1&3$&/5"(&
o
o o o
o o o
o
o
:&"3
25
COMPLEX CRIME
During 2007/08, the OPP conducted
prosecutions involving complex crimes
in the areas of organised crime, police
corruption, drug trafficking and major
commercial fraud. These cases involve
extensive investigation and pre-trial
preparation, often extend over many
years and require considerable high-level
resources to be allocated by the OPP.
Many of these cases are conducted under
intense media and public scrutiny.
ORGANISED CRIME
The OPP continued to prepare and
prosecute matters arising from Victoria
Police’s Purana Taskforce, which was
set up in 2003 to investigate organised
crime networks. The office worked with
the Commonwealth DPP to secure the
extradition of Mr M from Greece and
return him to Victoria to face serious
charges. During the year, criminal
proceedings involving underworld figures
led to the DPP taking action to prevent
the screening of the Underbelly television
series to ensure that the accused persons
involved in these cases received fair trials
free of any adverse publicity.
CORRUPTION
Throughout the year, the OPP provided
a prosecution service for Victoria Police’s
Ethical Standards Department (ESD)
and the Office of Police Integrity (OPI)
in matters involving police corruption.
Matters received for prosecution from
these agencies ranged from relatively
minor offences through to serious
instances of corrupt behaviour. The OPP
also provided advice to the ESD and OPI
about whether sufficient evidence existed
for a prosecution to proceed in a number
of matters.
The DPP agreed to take over the
prosecution of a number of summary
offences involving police officers as
defendants, with the DPP and Victoria
police recognising the public interest in
EXTRADITION ON SERIOUS CHARGES
In August 2001, Mr M was charged in Victoria with drug trafficking
and released on bail. Four years later, in 2005, Mr M was committed
for trial to the Supreme Court on these charges. Meanwhile, the
Commonwealth DPP was also pursuing charges against Mr M relating
to the importation of narcotics. The Commonwealth trial started in early
2006, with the trial for the Victorian offences scheduled to start directly
after the completion of the Commonwealth trial.
In March 2006, as the Commonwealth trial was proceeding,
Mr M absconded. The trial continued in his absence and he was
convicted and sentenced to 12 years’ imprisonment, with a nonparole period of nine years.
As a consequence of Mr M’s disappearance, the Victorian DPP
sought a warrant from the Supreme Court for his arrest. In June 2007,
following an investigation by Victoria Police into the murders of two
underworld figures, Mr M was charged with two counts of murder, 14
counts of drug trafficking and two counts of attempting to pervert the
course of justice.
In June 2007, Mr M was arrested in Greece. Two weeks later, the
Commonwealth and Victorian DPPs requested the Commonwealth
Attorney-General to apply to the Greek Government for Mr M’s
extradition. The extradition was conducted by the Commonwealth
Attorney-General’s Department, with the Victorian DPP and Victoria
Police providing background information and affidavits.
On 24 July 2007, the Greek Court of Appeal ordered Mr M’s
extradition to Australia. Mr M immediately appealed the decision to
the Greek Supreme Court, which upheld the extradition order on 18
March 2008. Under Greek law, the extradition required the approval
of the Minister of Justice, which was granted on 7 May 2008. Mr M
finally arrived back in Australia on 17 May 2008.
The OPP solicitor currently handling the case pointed out that
extraditions can move slowly and are complicated processes. But
he added: “It is important to have Mr M back to face the very serious
charges outstanding against him in Victoria.”
GANGLAND KILLER FOUND GUILTY
On 29 May 2008, a Supreme Court jury found Mr G, a 38-year-old
career criminal, guilty of gunning down underworld figure Lewis
Moran at the height of Melbourne’s so-called “gangland wars”.
On 31 March 2004, Mr G and another man entered the Brunswick
Club in Sydney Road, Brunswick, wearing balaclavas. Mr G then
chased Moran around the club before shooting him twice in the head
at close range with a handgun. Moran died instantly at the scene.
After a lengthy investigation by Victoria Police’s Purana Taskforce,
Mr G was charged with Moran’s murder and the attempted murder of
Moran’s companion on the night.
During the trial, which commenced in April 2008, the prosecution’s
main witness (code-named JP) gave evidence that he was hired
to murder Lewis Moran, had recruited Mr G to his “hit team” and
had driven the getaway car on the night of the murder. The court
also heard that convicted triple murderer Carl Williams and another
accused had provided money to finance the murder.
The trial ran for eight weeks and was the basis for an earlier court
order made by Justice Betty King prohibiting the broadcasting in
Victoria of the Channel Nine television drama series Underbelly.
At the time of his conviction for the murder of Lewis Moran, it was
revealed that Mr G was already serving a jail term for the murder of
Lewis Caine, whose body was found dumped in a Brunswick street
in May 2004.
DELIVERING A HIGH QUALITY, EFFECTIVE PROSECUTION SERVICE
maintaining an independent approach to
these prosecutions.
The OPP concluded prosecutions arising
from Operation Air, an investigation by the
Office of Police Integrity into the suspected
criminal activities of some former members
of the now-disbanded Victoria Police
Armed Offenders Squad.
MAJOR DRUG CASES
In 2007/08, the OPP continued to work
through a number of major drug trafficking
and drug syndicate cases. The growing
use of modern surveillance techniques by
police means that these cases increasingly
involve multiple defendants and extensive
evidentiary material. Recognising that
these matters often take several years
to resolve, the OPP focused during the
year on trying to obtain pleas of guilty in
these cases, with the aim of completing
them at as early a stage as possible in the
prosecution process.
The OPP worked closely with Victoria
Police in the investigation and prosecution
of syndicates involved in clandestine
drug laboratories and large hydroponic
marijuana crops, and in curbing the
growing incidence of “party drugs” and
ATS (amphetamine type substances).
“Major drug cases are very
difficult to resolve quickly. Many
defendants are well-resourced
and they can afford to fight
prosecutors every step of the
way. Delay works in their favour
and it takes a lot of hard work
and effort to get these cases
before the courts. So it’s very
satisfying when we get a result.”
Lucia Palgan
Legal Prosecution Specialist – Drugs
OPERATION AIR
Operation Air involved an investigation by the Office of Police Integrity
(OPI) into the suspected criminal activities of some members of the
now disbanded Victoria Police Armed Offenders Squad. In particular,
the investigation focused on allegations of abuse of police powers
when suspects were detained in police custody.
During 2007/08, the OPP’s Corruption Section concluded the
prosecutions arising from Operation Air, resulting in the conviction of
three former Victoria Police detectives for assault.
The three detectives were caught on video repeatedly assaulting a
suspect, after bringing him back to the St Kilda Road police complex
for questioning about the armed robbery of two jewellery stores.
Unknown to the detectives, the OPI had placed cameras in the
interview room.
The video was first aired at an OPI hearing in November 2006,
with the three detectives initially denying it was them on the tape.
Following the OPI hearing, the men were suspended from the police
force and resigned in 2007. After plea negotiations, the three each
pleaded guilty to one count of unlawful assault and one count of
misleading the Director of the OPI.
Magistrate Peter Lauritsen heard evidence that the men assaulted
the suspect on five separate occasions over four hours, including
slapping him around the face, striking him on the side of the head
with a tissue box and hitting him with a telephone when he asked to
make a phone call. One of the detectives had told the suspect that
his ear would be “coming off by the end of the day”.
The Magistrate also heard evidence from the defence that the
three detectives acted out of desperation because they were under
pressure to locate a missing shotgun used in the armed robberies
before it could be used on anyone else, and that they deeply
regretted the impact of the incident on their families, friends and
fellow police officers.
Sentencing the three men, the Magistrate stated that the
detectives had abused their position and would almost certainly
not have been caught if not for the OPI surveillance. On the assault
charges, he sentenced two of the men to 10 weeks’ imprisonment
and one to five weeks’ imprisonment, to be served in the community
on an Intensive Correction Order. On the charge of misleading
the Director of the OPI, all three were sentenced to a further three
months’ imprisonment, also to be served by way of an Intensive
Correction Order.
27
COMMERCIAL CRIME
During the year, the OPP’s commercial
crime section prepared and prosecuted
complex “white collar crime” cases,
working closely with the Victoria Police
Major Fraud Squad. As in previous years,
these cases involved multiple volumes of
evidentiary material, numerous witnesses
(some from interstate and overseas) and
lengthy trials. Many also involved the
added complexity of considering civil
concepts, such as mortgages, bills of
exchange and international transactions.
In 2007/08, the section continued to
prepare prosecutions arising from the
series of major frauds against Victoria
University. The OPP also worked hard
to incorporate the requirements of the
Victims’ Charter into the prosecution of
commercial crime, recognising that the
victims of fraud often incur significant and
irreplaceable financial losses.
“These are highly intensive
investigations because there’s
always a lot of material to sift
through. But there’s great
satisfaction in getting to the point
in the process where we are
satisfied with the case we can
present and feel confident that
we’ll get a conviction.”
Shane Kenna
Commercial Crime
Shane Kenna
Solicitor
Commercial Crime
“Premeditated, calculated and sophisticated.” That’s how
Shane Kenna describes matters he prosecutes as part of
the OPP’s commercial crime section – and it’s the reason
Shane continues to find working at the OPP an interesting and
stimulating experience.
“Commercial fraud is usually very well planned,” says
Shane. “So our work is mostly document-driven inquiries.
It’s all about ‘linkages’ – we have to carefully link together
pieces of evidence along a document trail until we discover
the particular document or series of documents that will
lead to conviction.”
While Shane’s cases range from relatively simple bankcard
scams to complicated mortgage manipulations, most are
highly complex due to the large volumes of documents
involved. The biggest case Shane has prosecuted involved
nearly 130 volumes of documents, and he is currently working
on a multi-million dollar investment fraud with around 120
victims. “These are highly intensive investigations because
there’s always a lot of material to sift through,” he says. “But
there’s great satisfaction in getting to the point in the process
where we are satisfied with the cases we can present and feel
confident that we’ll get a conviction.”
Shane joined the OPP in 1998 after many years in private
practice as a solicitor and barrister. A longstanding interest
in commercial law led to him joining the office’s commercial
crime section in 2005. “I’m still amazed by the schemes
that people come up with,” he says. “But I never forget that
these schemes also involve victims – including people who
have been cheated out of their life savings or defrauded of
hundreds of thousands of dollars.”
Shane enjoys working as part of the small, highly dedicated
commercial crime team within the OPP. “We pretty much live
in each other’s pockets,” he laughs. “But we’re very focused
on taking our cases to a successful conclusion. We don’t let
much distract us from that task.”
The team also works closely with the police, especially the
Major Fraud Squad. “We complement the hard work of the
police,” says Shane. “They gather the evidence, which is often
a painstaking and thankless task. We put the finishing touches
on their work, make sure we have all the evidence we need
and then run the matter in court.
“All of us – the OPP prosecutors and the police – work very
hard to put the best case we can to the court. That’s what
we’re here for and that’s what we aim to achieve.”
PRINCIPAL PROSECUTIONS
Throughout 2007/08, the OPP conducted
a high volume of general prosecutions,
with major cases involving murder and
attempted murder, manslaughter,
serious assaults, armed robberies and
culpable driving.
HOMICIDES
The OPP faced the challenge of
prosecuting a number of major homicide
cases that involved intensive media
scrutiny and public interest. These cases
involved the OPP working closely with the
Victoria Police Homicide Squad.
The OPP’s senior solicitors working
in the homicide area have developed
considerable expertise in these
prosecutions and are now also taking
responsibility for matters referred by
the Victoria Police Major Collision
Investigation Unit. This will involve
prosecuting driving offences that result in
death or serious injury.
A significant development during the
year was the Victorian Government’s
announcement of a new law, known as
“Cody’s Law”, which introduced the charge
of child homicide in response to the original
sentence imposed by the Supreme Court
in the case of McMaster in August 2007.
“In our homicide prosecutions,
we work closely with the
Homicide Squad and we
greatly value their dedication
and professionalism. Members
of the squad are always very
accessible and helpful to the
OPP solicitors and Crown
Prosecutors working on these
difficult cases.”
Richard Lewis
Legal Prosecution Specialist – Homicide
ART FRAUD LEADS TO JAIL
It has been hailed as a “breakthrough” and “the first serious
conviction of art fraud in Australia”. In November 2007, in the first
successful prosecution of its type in Victoria, a Melbourne couple
received a prison term after being found guilty of forging works by a
leading Aboriginal artist.
Mr and Mrs L, aged 67 and 65, received more than $300,000 after
forging and selling four paintings supposedly by renowned artist
Rover Thomas, whose works are sought by collectors around the
world and have fetched prices in excess of $700,000.
The County Court heard that Mrs L created the paintings by
copying from art catalogues and books. Mr and Mrs L then sold
the works to collectors through leading auction houses and were
working on a further two paintings when they were arrested by
police in March 2006.
The couple told the auction houses that Mrs L had inherited the
paintings from her late father, who had known Rover Thomas when
he worked in the Kimberley region of Western Australia. Mr and Mrs
L made no attempt to cover their tracks when they sold the paintings,
attending the auction houses in person, never using a third party
and always giving their own names. Very little effort was made by the
auction houses to verify Mrs L’s story, something that Judge Williams
called “absurd” during the hearing.
Sentencing the couple, Judge Williams observed that “the fraud
was deeply premeditated and highly planned ... and a matter of
embarrassment for all of the auction houses”. He noted that Mr and
Mrs L had attempted to enrich themselves dishonestly “at the cost of
innocent third parties and the integrity of the art industry, particularly
the Aboriginal art industry, which must suffer when this sort of activity
is brought to light”.
Judge Williams sentenced Mr and Mrs L to three years,
imprisonment each; however, due to their age and ill health, he
directed that they serve nine months in jail and the remainder of
their sentences be suspended. The judge stated that he may have
imposed a wholly suspended sentence had the couple pleaded
guilty. “I can’t help feeling the community would be somewhat
alarmed with the system if people can commit very significant
fraud, deny it, run the case in court, go down and then be allowed
to walk,” he said.
For many people in the art industry, the successful prosecution
of Mr and Mrs L was seen as a significant step. Robyn Sloggett,
Director of Melbourne University’s Centre for Cultural Materials
Conservation (who helped prove that the paintings were fraudulent)
told the ABC’s Stateline program: “It’s fired a shot across the bows,
really. It’s established that this is a serious crime and that it’s dealt
with seriously.”
In June 2008, the OPP participated in an art fraud forum at the
University of Melbourne, along with representatives of Victoria Police,
criminologists, commercial gallery owners, auction house experts,
academics and artists. The forum heard that the art market boom
has led to a significant increase in “problematic” works, with the
Aboriginal art market being particularly vulnerable.
29
The Attorney-General stated that the new
offence was being introduced to better
reflect the seriousness with which the
community views the killing of a child. The
DPP later appealed unsuccessfully against
McMaster’s sentence (see Appeals against
sentence in 2007/08 on page 10).
WORKPLACE DEATHS AND INJURIES
Occupational health and safety
prosecutions are one of the fastest growing
areas of the OPP’s legal practice. In
2007/08, the OPP prosecuted a range of
matters for WorkSafe Victoria, successfully
prosecuting serious breaches of the
Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 that
resulted in the death or serious injury of
employees or other persons at a workplace.
The OPP also reviewed matters referred to
the DPP where WorkSafe Victoria decided
not to bring a prosecution.
Other than WorkSafe, the OPP also
manages cases referred by external
agencies for prosecution by the DPP in
the higher courts. These agencies include
the Environment Protection Authority,
the Transport Accident Commission and
various government departments.
CORONIAL INQUIRIES
The OPP’s prosecutors assisted the State
Coroner of Victoria in a number of inquests
and assessed findings forwarded from
the Coroner to the DPP in matters where
the Coroner believed that an indictable
offence may have been committed in
connection with a death. OPP solicitors
working on these matters also provided
input into the current review of the
Coroners Act 1985, which will reform
coronial practices and procedures.
The Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
also met with the newly appointed State
Coroner, Judge Jennifer Coate, to discuss
ways in which the OPP could improve its
assistance to the Coroner.
TWO TRIALS NEEDED FOR MURDER CONVICTION
In February 2008, the Supreme Court sentenced Mr W to 26 years’
imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 20 years, for the murder of
a security guard during an armed robbery.
Mr W shot the security guard in the head with a high-powered
rifle after he tried to stop an armed robbery at a suburban club in
Melbourne. The guard had attempted to defuse the situation after Mr
W and two other men had bailed him up outside the club and walked
him inside. But the confrontation escalated and one of the men
moved quickly towards the security guard who drew his revolver and
shot the man in the buttocks. Mr W then fired a number of shots at
the security guard’s head and chest, fatally wounding him. Mr W and
the two men fled the scene with $10,000 in stolen cash.
Two months after the robbery, all three men were arrested. Mr W’s
accomplices pleaded guilty to armed robbery and manslaughter,
receiving reduced sentences because they agreed to give evidence
against Mr W. Mr W pleaded not guilty to one count of murder and
one count of armed robbery. In June 2007, the jury hearing the
charges was discharged after being unable to reach a verdict. Mr W
was re-arraigned on the same charges and again pleaded not guilty.
In November 2007 the jury in the second trial found Mr W guilty of
armed robbery and murder.
At the sentencing hearing, Justice Whelan noted that Mr W had
prior convictions for armed robbery, drug trafficking, driving offences
and affray. At the time of the armed robbery, he was trafficking in
heroin. The prosecution submitted victim impact statements from
the security guard’s wife and parents, and from two of the club’s
staff members who were present when he was killed. Justice
Whelan noted that the statements “speak graphically of the terrible
consequences of [Mr W’s] actions that night”.
Justice Whelan also observed: “Violent crimes of this nature,
where the perpetrators are motivated by nothing more than the
desire to obtain money, are the most serious kind which come
before the courts.”
COMPANY FINED AFTER WORKER SERIOUSLY INJURED
In 2004, a 33-year-old worker on an Offshore Drilling Unit operated by
a petroleum exploration company suffered serious and debilitating
injuries when a 2.7 tonne steel diverter running tool was hit by a
moving gantry crane, swinging around off its saddle and rolling
over his legs. The worker’s injuries included head and leg fractures,
heavy blood loss and the amputation of one leg. A second worker
sustained minor injuries after jumping clear of the diverter running
tool. Both men had been working without direct supervision, despite
being reasonably novice employees.
The OPP prosecuted the company on behalf of WorkSafe
Victoria. In the Magistrates’ Court in Melbourne in April 2008, the
company was convicted and fined a total of $150,000 for failing to
provide plant and systems of work that were safe, and for failing
to provide necessary training and supervision for workers. The
company pleaded guilty to these charges and was also ordered
to pay $25,000 costs.
The culpability of the company was aggravated by the fact that a
similar incident occurred in 2001, which resulted in a worker being
killed. After that accident, the company put some safety measures
in place, but these steps proved to be inadequate. Since the 2004
accident, further safety measures have been put in place, including
the supervision of novice employees working in such areas.
MENTAL IMPAIRMENT AND
UNFITNESS TO BE TRIED
The OPP continues to develop its
expertise in matters involving offenders
with a mental impairment. During the
year, OPP solicitors:
• prosecuted a range of cases involving
mentally impaired persons
• represented the DPP in proceedings
involving a variation in supervision orders
relating to mentally impaired persons who
had been found unfit to be tried or not
guilty because of mental impairment
• monitored reviews in the Supreme Court
and County Court regarding the status
of mentally impaired offenders and
made sure that victims of these offences
were given the opportunity to make a
submission to the court
• contributed to the development of the
Department of Justice’s new Justice
Mental Health Strategy, which is
considering a range of interventions to
better meet the needs of offenders, victims
and witnesses with cognitive impairment
• contributed to the draft Director’s
Policy on Mental Impairment and
Unfitness to be Tried, which will
provide guidelines for decisions made
by the DPP in these matters
• worked closely with Forensicare,
Victoria Police, the Department of
Justice and the Department of Human
Services to ensure that these matters
are handled fairly, sensitively and as
expeditiously as possible.
Recognising the importance of this
expanding area of prosecution practice,
the OPP created the position of
Legal Prosecution Specialist – Mental
Impairment to lead the development of
expertise in these cases.
MENTAL IMPAIRMENT PROSECUTIONS
Cases involving issues of mental impairment are among the most difficult and distressing matters handled by the OPP. In 2007/08, the
office prosecuted a number of significant cases where mental impairment was raised as a defence, including the two contrasting cases
summarised below.
‘TRAGIC FOR ALL INVOLVED’
MENTAL IMPAIRMENT DEFENCE REJECTED
On an evening in June 2006, Mr B (a 26-year-old Sudanese refugee)
walked into a medical clinic in a Melbourne suburb, sat in the waiting
room for a few minutes and then went into Dr M’s consulting rooms
where he stabbed the GP 26 times with two knives. Dr M died almost
immediately from blood loss caused by the stab wounds.
Forty-five minutes later, Mr B entered the local police station,
presented a knife and informed a senior constable that “he had done
something bad”. Mr B was arrested and subsequently charged with
Dr M’s murder.
Evidence was given at Mr B’s trial in March 2008 that he suffered
from Hepatitis C and had attended the medical centre on five
previous occasions for treatment when he had shown no signs of
animosity towards Dr M or her colleagues. The Supreme Court jury
heard that Mr B was delusional, that he believed doctors had infected
him with Hepatitis C and that Dr M and others had conspired to
deprive him of treatment. The jury also heard that Dr M had been
a compassionate physician with a particular interest in helping
refugees. The DPP and the defence agreed that Mr B should be
found not guilty due to mental impairment.
The jury found Mr B not guilty of the murder of Dr M for reasons
of mental impairment. Ordering Mr B to be detained in a psychiatric
institution for 25 years, Justice Curtain observed that “the case was
tragic for all involved”.
Mr F returned home from work one evening in September 2005 to
find his wife in an incoherent state. He asked about the whereabouts
of the couple’s two young sons, aged 11 and 9, and was told by
his wife that they were staying at a friend’s house for tea. Shortly
afterward, Mr F discovered his older son lying unconscious on the
floor in the main bedroom and his younger son unconscious on his
bed. The children were not breathing and had no pulse. Mr F called
an ambulance while performing CPR on his sons. When ambulance
and fire brigade officers arrived at the house, they confirmed that the
children were deceased.
Mrs F was transported to hospital where she was treated for
injuries to her neck, arms and legs. She was then taken to the
Homicide Squad offices and later admitted as an involuntary patient
under the Mental Health Act 1986. In September 2005, Mrs F was
charged with the murders of her sons and remanded in custody.
During her trial, the Supreme Court heard evidence that Mrs F
had admitted on a number of occasions that she had killed her sons.
Her defence was that she was mentally impaired at the time of the
murders. The DPP did not agree that Mrs F was mentally impaired
and argued that she had planned the killings and that her actions
were pre-meditated and cold blooded, and carried out “consciously,
voluntarily and deliberately”.
In May 2008, the Supreme Court jury found Mrs F guilty of the
murder of her two sons. In July 2008, Justice Nettle sentenced
Mrs F to 24 years’ imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 18
years. On 30 July 2008, the DPP announced his decision to appeal
the sentence on the basis that it did not sufficiently reflect the
seriousness of the offences. Mrs F is appealing her conviction.
31
Louise Wilkinson and Julie Carpenter
Legal Prosecution Specialists
Mental Impairment
After many years working full time, Louise Wilkinson and Julie
Carpenter are enjoying the benefits of job-sharing as they
settle into their new roles of Legal Prosecution Specialists – the
first time that such a position within the OPP has been shared.
Louise and Julie are senior solicitors with extensive
experience in prosecuting – and both have young families.
In February 2008, having job-shared a position of Program
Manager since December 2007, they approached the Solicitor
for Public Prosecutions to see if they could apply jointly for
one of the new Legal Prosecution Specialist positions being
created within the office. “With preschool children at home, we
saw job-sharing as a way to spend more time with our families
and still keep our careers on track,” says Louise.
They were pleased with the positive response to their
approach. “We were aware that this hadn’t been done before
in the OPP and we were also aware that you can get stuck
in a backwater in some organisations if you job-share – but
that wasn’t the case here,” says Louise. Adds Julie: “We were
encouraged to apply, made a joint application for one of the
LPS positions and presented jointly to the interviewing panel.
People were supportive throughout the process and continue
to be supportive.”
Louise and Julie each work three days a week, overlapping
on Mondays. Julie says it is working “fantastically well”,
thanks to a carefully structured process of exchanging
communication about cases and issues. “We’re very
conscious of not wasting the time of other people in the office
by making them explain things twice,” she says. “Our system
means that people can talk to either of us and be confident
that we are up-to-date with a particular matter.”
The complexity of mental impairment prosecutions raises
particular challenges in job sharing. “These cases are
complicated and can involve a lot of difficult issues,” says
Louise. “It’s an area where you need to talk things through
and Julie and I can do that.” Julie agrees that communication
is the key to success. “It helps that, while we’ve taken
different paths to get here, Louise and I see things in the
same way,” she says. “So far, we haven’t disagreed on how
to handle a matter.”
Both Louise and Julie are pleased with the flexibility jobsharing provides. “It gives me the opportunity to work part
time, spend time with my family and still get my teeth into a
challenging area of the law,” notes Louise. For Julie, working
part time has given her new energy and enthusiasm. “I come
in after two days at home and I’m full of energy. I bounce into
the office and can’t wait to get started. Of course, it helps that
I’ve just spent two days hanging out with preschoolers,” she
laughs. “That’s incentive enough to get back to the office.”
PROCEEDS OF CRIME
In 2007/08, the OPP again recorded
significant successes in confiscating assets
that have been used in the commission
of a crime or purchased with the
proceeds of crime. During the year, the
OPP’s Confiscations Team conducted
litigation on behalf of the DPP under the
Confiscation Act 1997, confiscating more
than $10 million in assets from criminals.
The team also:
• continued to pursue the confiscation of
tainted assets relating to Mr M and his
family and associates
• obtained several large Pecuniary Penalty
Orders (where an offender pays back
to the state the dollar value of a benefit
received as the result of a crime), some in
excess of $1 million
• contributed to the Victorian
Government’s review of the Confiscation
Act 1997 and the operation of the asset
confiscation scheme
• successfully appealed a decision of the
Court of Appeal to the High Court in
relation to the exclusion of property from
confiscation
• continued to work with the Department
of Justice and Victoria Police to improve
the practical operation of the Act and the
asset confiscation scheme.
“… a ‘big leap forward’ came in
2004, when the OPP received
substantial additional funding
from the Victorian Government
to expand its work in the
confiscations area.“
David Gray
Manager of the OPP’s
Proceeds of Crime Directorate
BUILDING A NATIONAL REPUTATION
The philosophy underpinning Victoria’s Confiscation Act 1997 is
that criminals should not benefit and prosper from their crimes.
The Act provides a mechanism for the State of Victoria to seize
“tainted” assets that have been used in the commission of a crime or
purchased with the proceeds of crime. Confiscation usually involves
an offender surrendering to the state the tainted assets or paying
back to the state the dollar value of the benefit received as the result
of a crime.
David Gray, Manager of the OPP’s Proceeds of Crime Directorate,
has overseen the expansion of the office’s confiscations section
from one to 10 solicitors since 2002. “The area of confiscations has
undergone a substantial transformation and escalation over the last
four to five years,” he says. “Essentially, we have had to build our
practice in this area from the ground up, developing knowledge and
expertise along the way.”
David says that a “big leap forward” came in 2004, when the
OPP received substantial additional funding from the Victorian
Government to expand its work in the confiscations area. “Those new
resources meant that we could recruit from the private sector some
highly experienced and talented commercial litigators. Since then, the
number of confiscation orders we have obtained and the value of the
assets forfeited has increased dramatically.”
The OPP’s confiscations team is widely acknowledged as playing
a leading role in the success of Victoria’s asset confiscation scheme.
David Gray says that it’s because the expertise developed by the
team puts it in a strong position to “fight toe-to-toe with the highpriced lawyers and accountants that many of these criminals employ
to protect their assets”. He points out that his team has a skills set
that was not previously available to the OPP, including solicitors with
diverse civil litigation experience and a forensic accountant. “When
you’re talking about organised crime groups or large-scale drug
traffickers, you’re talking about sophisticated operations with a lot of
resources,” says David. “We now have the skills and the experience
to take them on in a much more robust manner.”
The impact of confiscations on the OPP’s prosecution practice
is also reflected in the recruitment of leading commercial barrister
Peter Rose SC to join Crown Prosecutors’ Chambers. Peter brings
extensive experience in commercial litigation to his role as Senior
Crown Prosecutor and acts as in-house counsel in confiscation
litigation. He notes that “confiscation is an effective deterrent and one
that will be used more and more in the fight against major crime”.
As well as using asset confiscation as part of its general
prosecution practice, the OPP has also tested the courts’
interpretation of the law surrounding Victoria’s scheme. Over the past
two or three years, several decisions of the Victorian Court of Appeal
have had an impact on the operation of the Confiscation Act 1997 –
decisions that have led to the Victorian Parliament passing amending
legislation to overturn the judgments. David Gray observed: “This is a
relatively new jurisdiction, so differences in interpretation are bound to
arise. Where the DPP has been dissatisfied with the approach taken
by the courts, we have challenged those decisions – taking them to
the High Court in some instances.”
33
APPEALS, BAILS AND BREACHES
During the year, the OPP continued to
undertake a high volume of County Court
appeals, conducted a number of appeals
in higher courts and represented the DPP
in bail applications and breaches of noncustodial orders in the Supreme Court.
COUNTY COURT APPEALS
In 2007/08, the OPP completed over 1,900
County Court appeals. The vast majority
of cases involved the OPP representing
the DPP as respondent to appeals instituted by defendants.
The OPP continues to face challenges in
managing the high volume and increasing
complexity of appeals within the Magistrates’
Court jurisdiction (more serious crimes are
being dealt with in the Magistrates’ Court as
the criminal jurisdiction of the Magistrates’
Court has increased). Appeals conducted
by the office during the year covered a
wide range of matters, including offences
such as assault and burglary, appeals from
the Children’s Court, a small number of
Commonwealth cases (such as counterfeiting)
and offences prosecuted by external
agencies such as WorkSafe, Corrections
Victoria and VicRoads.
During the year, the OPP also
conducted a number of appeals to the
County Court against sentences imposed
in the Magistrates’ Court.
BAILS AND BREACHES
Solicitors working in the OPP’s Bails and
Breaches section respond on behalf of
the DPP where applications for bail are
made in the Supreme Court or the Court
of Appeal. They also bring breaches of
non-custodial orders (such as suspended
sentences, community-based orders and
home detention back before the Supreme
and County Courts. In 2007/08, the section
handled 125 bail applications and 468
breaches of non-custodial orders.
HIGHER COURT APPEALS
The Director of Public Prosecutions has
the power to appeal to the Supreme
PROTECTING VICTORIA’S CONFISCATIONS SCHEME
In 2003, Mr L was charged with trafficking in a commercial quantity
of heroin. After Mr L was charged with this and a number of other
offences, the DPP applied to the County Court for a restraining order
over his apartment. In 2005, Mr L pleaded guilty to the trafficking
charge and was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment.
Under the Confiscation Act 1997, Mr L’s restrained apartment
would be forfeited to the State of Victoria 60 days after his conviction,
unless an application was made to exclude all or part of the property
from the restraining order by a person claiming an interest in the
property. Within the time period, Mr L’s wife applied to the court for
an exclusion order. Mr L had transferred the apartment to Mrs L (and
himself) as joint tenants two months after the trafficking charges
were filed, but before the restraining order was made. Mrs L had
not paid any money to acquire her share in the apartment (as Mr L
had transferred it to her for “natural love and affection”). The DPP
opposed Mrs L’s application on the grounds that her interest was
acquired by way of a gift in circumstances where she must have
known about Mr L’s illegal activity. The DPP also argued that even if
the court found that Mrs L had a lawful interest in the property, only
her share could be excluded from confiscation.
In March 2006, the County Court ordered that the whole of the
property be excluded from forfeiture, effectively ensuring that the
apartment remained the legal property of Mrs L. The DPP appealed
this decision to the Court of Appeal, which dismissed the appeal.
The DPP then obtained special leave to appeal to the High Court
of Australia. The DPP was concerned that if the Court of Appeal
decision was allowed to stand, Victoria’s asset confiscation regime
would be seriously undermined. In effect, the decision would allow
people to use their spouses, partners and family members to avoid
having their assets confiscated.
On 14 November 2007, the High Court handed down its
decision, which was that an applicant for exclusion of property
could only have their interest, and not the whole property,
excluded. This meant that Mrs L would only be permitted to keep
her half-share of the apartment.
Prior to the High Court decision being handed down, the Victorian
Government had already moved to amend the Confiscation Act
1997 to protect the integrity of the confiscations regime. These
amendments, which came into operation in September 2007, make
it clear that successful applicants for exclusion of property can only
have their interest in the property excluded (not the whole property)
and that an applicant cannot claim to have acquired the property
for “sufficient consideration” when it has been transferred as a gift
or for natural love and affection. The amendments also introduce a
new category of “derived property”, which includes property that is
“derived or realised, or substantially derived or realised, directly or
indirectly, from an unlawful activity”. These amendments strengthen
Victoria’s asset confiscation regime and will make it even more
difficult for criminals to avoid forfeiting the proceeds of their illegal
activities to the state.
Court, the Court of Appeal and the High
Court of Australia in a number of specific
circumstances. The OPP’s Higher Court
Appeals Unit conducts these matters on
behalf of the DPP.
Appeals to the High Court of Australia
Section 35 of the Judiciary Act 1903
(Commonwealth) gives jurisdiction to the
High Court to hear and determine appeals
by the DPP. Appeals can only be brought
by special leave of the Court itself.
During 2007/08, no applications were
filed by the DPP for special leave to appeal
to the High Court.
The Director was respondent in seven
applications for special leave heard during
2007/08, all of which were refused.
Appeals under the Magistrates’ Court Act
1989 section 92 of the Magistrates’ Court Act
1989 allows a party to criminal proceedings
in the Magistrates’ Court to appeal to the
Supreme Court on a question of law. The
DPP conducts these appeals on behalf of
police informants.
In 2007/08, the DPP was formally
requested in 14 cases to institute s.92 appeals
on behalf of police informants. Seven of
these appeals commenced during the year.
Seven appeals were heard and completed
in the Supreme Court and one appeal was
abandoned. At 30 June 2008, three s.92
appeals were still pending.
The DPP also acted for respondent
police informants in 18 appeals brought by
defendants.
One s.92-related application by a defendant to the Court of Appeal was completed.
No High Court applications or appeals
relating to s.2 matters were commenced or
determined.
APPEALS UNDER S567A OF THE
CRIMES ACT 1958
Section 567A of the Crimes Act 1958 gives
the DPP the power to appeal to the Court of
Appeal against sentences imposed by trial
judges. Details of these appeals are set out in the
Annual Report of the DPP and in Appendix 3.
Matthew Andison
Solicitor
Matthew Andison completed his Law degree in 2006 while
working full time in a para-legal position within the OPP. Having
been accepted into the OPP’s Articled Clerkship Program in
March 2007, Matthew was rotated through seven sections
within the office, including the Confiscations section and
the Committals Advocacy Unit, as well as a secondment in
the Administrative Law Branch of the Victorian Government
Solicitor’s Office. “I had a fantastic articles year,” says Matthew,
“and I consider myself very fortunate to have had the valuable
experience that I’ve had at the OPP.”
In April 2008, Matthew applied successfully for a position
within the OPP’s Higher Court Appeals section where he works
primarily on preparing summaries of evidence and summaries
of proceedings in cases before the Court of Appeal. In these
cases, the OPP represents the Crown as the respondent
(where a convicted person is appealing against conviction or
sentence) but Matthew also prepares Crown appeals to the
Court of Appeal against sentences.
Matthew says that he is “very happy here at the moment,
trying to learn as much as I can and working towards being a
more senior solicitor, perhaps with more advocacy and more
complex work”.
“I have always felt strongly about social justice and criminal
justice issues,” says Matthew. “I like that our work is informed
fundamentally by considerations of justice and fairness, and
that we go about our work having regard to the interests of all
those affected by it.”
As he gains more experience, Matthew is looking towards
working on judicial review proceedings in the Supreme Court
and appeals to the High Court. But he says, “For the moment,
I am very pleased with the opportunities I’ve been given at
the OPP since I started here in 2002 and I’m happy working
hard to contribute to the important work that the Higher Court
Appeals Unit does on a day-to-day basis.”
35
SERVING REGIONAL VICTORIA
The OPP continues to invest resources
and effort to deliver a high quality, high
performing prosecution service in rural and
regional Victoria.
The OPP’s Circuit Section employs
20 solicitors, who prepare and prosecute
criminal matters across three regional
areas: Northern, Eastern and Western
Victoria. During the year, the Supreme
and County Courts travelled on circuit to
hear matters in Wodonga, Wangaratta,
Shepparton, Morwell, Bairnsdale, Sale,
Horsham, Hamilton, Warrnambool,
Mildura, Bendigo, Ballarat and Geelong.
In addition, for the first time, the Court of
Appeal sat in the Latrobe Valley Justice
Precinct. Whenever the courts sit in these
regional centres, the OPP sends a team to
prosecute the criminal matters listed for
hearing. These teams usually comprise
a solicitor attached to the OPP’s Circuit
Section and either a Crown Prosecutor or a
private barrister briefed by the OPP.
In 2007/08, the Circuit Section
completed 155 matters in the northern part
of the state, 101 matters in eastern area
and 123 matters in western Victoria.
EASTERN CIRCUIT
Suzette Dootjes, Manager of the Eastern
Circuit section in 2007/08, says that “while
it has been ‘business as usual’ in the
eastern region, our solicitors have faced
added pressure because court hearings
have, at times, been scheduled at very short
notice”. This reduces the time that OPP
solicitors have to prepare prosecutions.
Matters prosecuted by the Eastern section
during the year included family violence,
aggravated burglaries, theft, culpable
driving and serious sex crimes. The Eastern
section also welcomed the opening of the
Latrobe Valley Justice Precinct. “It is a big
improvement in resources for us,” says
Suzette, “and it means that we will be able
to provide a better prosecution service to
Gippsland.” The section has also been
involved in the establishment of the pilot
MURDER – NOT SUICIDE
In February 2000, 42 year old Mr J of Tarrington in the western district
of Victoria shot his 75-year-old father in the kitchen of the residence
they both shared. Later in the day, Mr J entered the Hamilton police
station, apparently very distressed, and informed the police that his
father had been shot with a heavily modified shotgun. He implied that
his father must have committed suicide.
Four years after his father’s death, Mr J was arrested and
charged with murder. He pleaded not guilty. Mr J’s Supreme Court
trial initially opened in Warrnambool, but was later aborted and
moved to Geelong after stickers asserting his innocence were
posted around the town.
During his trial, the Crown presented evidence to the jury to refute
the notion that Mr J’s father had committed suicide, including evidence
about Mr J’s whereabouts at the time of the shooting, forensic
evidence about blood splatter patterns and blood stain markings, and
evidence about the relationship between Mr J and his father.
Mr J had lived at the property outside Hamilton for a number of
years and, at times, had a difficult relationship with his father. In his
twenties, Mr J enrolled in the Army Reserve and had developed a
deep and long-standing interest in firearms and weaponry. In 1988,
Mr J resigned from the Army Reserve after receiving an injury to his
right ear from an accident involving an anti-tank weapon. Evidence
was presented to the jury that Mr J suffered increasingly from tinnitus
and vertigo as a consequence of his injury. Psychiatric reports
presented to the court outlined that, at the time of the shooting,
Mr J was suffering from ongoing depression and that he was an
“obsessional and isolative man with some paranoid tendencies”.
Mr J was convicted of the murder of his father in 2007, seven
years after the crime was committed. In sentencing Mr J, Justice
Osborn accepted that Mr J’s relationship with his father had become
more difficult after the death of Mr J’s mother in 1994. He noted that
Mr J had “shot an unarmed and defenceless 75-year-old”, an act
that he called “cold-blooded and pre-meditated”. Justice Osborn
moderated Mr J’s sentence due to his depression and personality
characteristics which “mitigated his moral culpability”. Justice Osborn
also took note of the additional stress these factors would cause Mr J
as a consequence of a longer term of imprisonment.
Mr J was sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment for the murder of
his father, with a non-parole period of 16 years.
County Koori Court, which will open in
Morwell later in 2008.
NORTHERN CIRCUIT
Marwan El-Asmar, Acting Manager of
the Northern Circuit Section, reports
that “like the other Circuit Sections,
the Northern section has had a heavy
work load in 2007/08 with a variety of
matters to prosecute”. Marwan notes
that the section has also been involved
in some high profile and difficult cases
during the year. “All of our staff are
committed to delivering the very best
service possible,” he says. “But there are
ongoing challenges – the sex offences
workload is particularly demanding and
recent legislative changes, as well as
listing requirements, have shortened our
timelines for preparing cases.”
WESTERN CIRCUITS
“We have had a number of really good
successes in some difficult cases,” says
John Weigl, Manager of the Western
Circuit Section, of the section’s work in
2007/08. He notes: “We secured a guilty
plea in a serious rape where the doctor
stated that the injuries sustained by the
victim were the worst he had ever seen
on a living person. We also obtained a
murder conviction where the offender
During the year, all three Circuit
Sections dealt with a high
volume of serious sex offences.
This is a significant challenge
for his section. “But we work
very closely and productively
with the OPP’s Specialist Sex
Offences Unit in prosecuting
these matters.”
John Weigl
Western Circuit Manager
THE KOORI COURT
In 2002, the Victorian parliament passed the Magistrates’
Court (Koori Court) Act 2002, creating a special division of
the Magistrates’ Court to sentence Koori offenders who have
pleaded guilty. The Koori Court provides a more informal
hearing that allows greater involvement by the Aboriginal
community in the court process, with the overall aim of
reducing the over-representation of Koori people within the
criminal justice system.
Nine Magistrates’ Koori Courts now operate across Victoria,
including children’s and adult courts. These courts examine and
determine sentencing options for Koori offenders who plead
guilty to all offences other than serious sex offences and family
violence matters.
The Koori Court model has proved to be effective in
reducing recidivism among Koori offenders, with recidivism
rates reducing to nearly half the rate across the general
population since 2002. The Court has also helped to
increase the confidence of the Aboriginal community in the
administration of criminal law in Victoria. Following discussions
between the OPP, the Department of Justice, the Chief Judge
of the County Court, the Victorian Koori community and Koori
Court Elders, the Victorian Government decided in 2008 to
expand the model to the County Court.
Responsibility for developing an operational model for
the County Koori Court was given to a County Koori Court
Reference Group, which included representatives from the
County Court, the OPP, the Department of Justice, Victoria
Legal Aid, Koori Court Elders, the Victorian Aboriginal Legal
Service and the Koori community. The Reference Group’s
model was endorsed by the Council of Judges in late 2007
and the Aboriginal Justice Forum in early 2008.
When fully operational, the County Koori Court will follow
the same principles as the Magistrates’ Koori Court. It will
be available only to defendants of Aboriginal and/or Torres
Strait Islander descent; the defendant must consent to the
Koori Court hearing the matter; and the defendant must have
pleaded guilty. The Court will operate in a relatively informal
manner and proceedings will take place at an oval table,
involving the judge, Koori Elders and Respected Persons, the
Koori Court Officer, the defendant’s solicitor, the prosecutor,
a representative from Community Correctional Services and
the defendant in a “sentencing conversation”. Central to the
successful operation of the County Koori Court is that “due
recognition and respect to cultural considerations [is given]
... and can be seen as a positive step towards achieving
a fair justice system for Kooris in Victoria”. (A Sentencing
Conversation: Evaluation of the Koori Courts Pilot Program,
October 2002 – October 2004). Crown Prosecutors and
solicitors from the OPP’s Circuit Branch have volunteered to
undertake training.
The pilot County Koori Court will be established at the Latrobe
Valley Justice Precinct in Morwell in late 2008, with the first sitting
of the Court expected to take place in December 2008.
37
had made it look like a suicide. These are
important achievements in difficult cases
where a just and fair outcome resulted
from our prosecution.”
During the year, all three Circuit
Sections dealt with a high volume of
serious sex offences. Western Circuit
Manager John Weigl notes that this is “a
significant challenge” for his section. “But
we work very closely and productively with
the OPP’s Specialist Sex Offences Unit in
prosecuting these matters,” he says. “The
opening of the OPP’s new Geelong office
in 2009 will also help to relieve some of
these pressures.”
The Section also plays its part in
meeting the OPP’s commitment to the
early resolution of cases. “Across all
Circuit Sections, we try to achieve early
resolutions in matters,” says Marwan
El-Asmar. ”This has the advantage of not
putting victims through what are traumatic
and sometimes lengthy trials – something
that victims are often very relieved about
– and it also assists in reducing the backlog
of cases in the courts.”
In addition to meeting the heavy
demands of providing a prosecution
service to regional communities, the Circuit
Section contributes to a greater awareness
and understanding of the criminal justice
system by undertaking community legal
education activities, providing advice and
assistance to other agencies and promoting
the services provided by the OPP to
victims and witnesses.
Jenny Tregent
Magistrate
Magistrates’ Court
OPP Circuit solicitor appointed to the Magistrates’ Court
In June 2008, Jenny Tregent was appointed as a magistrate
after working as a solicitor in the Office for Public Prosecutions
for more than 15 years.
Jenny says that she will miss her work as a prosecutor
with the OPP, where most of her time was spent in the Circuit
section. “I will certainly miss aspects of going on circuit and I
will miss a number of people with whom I have built up close
and very productive professional relationships with over my
time with the office,” she says. “There are many great people
who do fantastic work in the OPP and who are very committed
to achieving just and fair outcomes in our court system.”
Following her appointment, Jenny undertook training in
order to carry out her new responsibilities. “This appointment
throws up some new challenges for me – not least of which
is that I will soon be hearing civil and family violence matters,
as well as the criminal matters with which I am much more
familiar,” she notes. “My training has included sitting with
a number of magistrates, but I will begin sitting on my own
– hearing relatively simple matters initially and more complex
matters at a later time.”
Jenny is immensely proud of her appointment because
it recognises the commitment and hard work of the OPP’s
solicitors. “It is not unusual for solicitors to be appointed to
the bench, but it is rare for solicitors who work at the ‘rank
and file’ level of things to be appointed,” she says. “I feel that
my appointment gives some recognition to the important
work that OPP solicitors carry out within the Victorian criminal
justice system.”
The Acting Solicitor for Public Prosecutions, Stuart Ward,
describes Jenny’s appointment to the Magistrates’ Court
as “great for the OPP and for those solicitors who work
day in and day out at the coalface of prosecutions”. Like
Jenny, Stuart sees the appointment not only as a reflection
of Jenny’s skill and experience, but as a recognition of the
expertise and knowledge that resides in this office. “Jenny’s
success is a wonderful example to our younger solicitors,” he
says. “It shows them that working in prosecutions can open
new doors and career paths that they may not previously
have considered.
“We are very proud of Jenny’s appointment, we thank
her for many years of service on circuit and wish her every
success in her new position.”
PIONEERING A NEW APPROACH TO
PROSECUTING SEX OFFENCES
In its first year of operation, the OPP’s
•Specialist
Sex Offences Unit laid down a
strong foundation for the development
of a new, specialised approach to
prosecuting serious sex offences. This
approach aims to achieve a high success
rate in prosecuting these offences, while
improving support to victims, developing
expertise in prosecuting sex crimes and
delivering greater consistency in the
conduct of prosecutions.
In April 2008, the Specialist Sex Offences
Unit (SSOU) completed its first year of
operation. The unit has achieved positive
results over the past year, meeting its targets
and providing a best-practice model for the
prosecution of serious sex offences.
THE OPP’S PIONEERING APPROACH
The OPP’s specialised approach to
prosecuting serious sex offences has a
number of significant features, including:
• a team approach, with Crown
Prosecutors, solicitors and advocates colocated in the same unit
• leadership from specialist in-house
Crown Prosecutors with expertise in
prosecuting sex crimes
• guidance, supervision and mentoring
from a Legal Prosecution Specialist with
experience in sex offences
• handling of a case by the same solicitor
from the initial stages through to the
eventual trial
• emphasis on the early resolution of cases
• a more informative and respectful
process for victims
• improved support for witnesses
• specialised training and guidelines for
prosecutors and private barristers
• greater consistency in the conduct of
prosecutions, court processes
and outcomes
• improved identification, collection
and analysis of statistics about serious
sex crimes
• proactive engagement in legal policy,
court processes and legislation covering
serious sex offences.
THE SPECIALIST SEX
OFFENCES UNIT
The Specialist Sex Offences Unit comprises
four Crown Prosecutors and 19 full time
solicitor positions, as well as administrative
and legal support staff.
The Unit prosecutes all serious sex
offences heard in the Melbourne County
Court or Supreme Court, whether the
victim is an adult or child. Unless there are
exceptional circumstances, the Unit does
not prosecute less serious sex offences
(which are heard in the Magistrates’ Court
and prosecuted by police) or matters where
the offender is a child (which are heard in
the Children’s Court).
Sex offence cases heard in the County
Court in regional Victoria are prosecuted
by the OPP’s Circuit Section. The SSOU
conducts an initial assessment of these
matters and provides advice to the Circuit
prosecuting team as required.
In its first year of operation, the Unit has
aimed to ensure that:
• prosecution cases are well-prepared
and timely
• cases are settled earlier, where possible
• there are fewer appeals caused by error
that results in retrial
• victims are treated with respect and kept
informed throughout the criminal justice
process supported by specialist solicitors
and social workers.
SUCCESS IN PROSECUTIONS
While further development of the SSOU
is ongoing, the Unit recorded significant
achievements in prosecutions in 2007/08,
including:
• prosecuting an increasing workload,
with the total number of sex offences
cases completed increasing by 40 per
cent from 2006/07
• achieving a guilty plea or a conviction at
trial in around 75 per cent of cases
• adopting a strong focus on resolving
matters at an early stage, reflecting the
unit’s commitment to minimising the
trauma for victims, while still securing an
appropriate sentence.
The Unit has developed a methodology
to collect data on the cases it prosecutes.
Commencing in July 2007, solicitors
complete a detailed statistics sheet at
the conclusion of each matter. This
information will be used by the Unit and
the OPP to analyse patterns and trends in
sex offences being prosecuted in Victoria.
REDUCING THE TRAUMA
FOR VICTIMS
A key aim of the SSOU and the OPP is to
prosecute sex offence cases in a way that
minimises the stress for victims and gives
them a greater confidence in the criminal
justice system.
During 2007/08, the Unit worked
closely with the OPP’s Witness Assistance
Service, the new Child Witness Service
and Victoria Police to ensure that
appropriate support and information
was provided to victims. The Unit’s
policy is that all complainants are offered
support from the Witness Assistance
Service or the Child Witness Service, and
conferences with the prosecuting team
are always offered at appropriate points
during the court proceedings.
POLICY AND PRACTICE ISSUES
The OPP’s specialised approach to
prosecuting sex offences means that the
office is well-placed to participate in the
implementation of policies and practices
relating to these offences. Key issues that
emerged during 2007/08 include:
• Implemention and monitoring of the Sexual
Assault Reform Package. The SSOU is
one of several major reforms introduced
by the Victorian Government as part
of the Sexual Assault Reform Package
announced in 2007. These reforms include
the new Child Witness Service, specialist
sex offences lists in the Magistrates’ and
County Courts, procedures that allow
children and vulnerable witnesses to
give evidence via video link, and training
for judges and lawyers in sexual assault
issues. During 2007/08, the SSOU
worked closely with external agencies to
ensure the success of these reforms and
to contribute to a more integrated and
seamless approach to supporting the
victims of serious sex crimes.
• Transfer of serious sex offences to the
Supreme Court. In early 2008, the
DPP met with senior Supreme Court
judges to discuss the transfer of these
offences to the Supreme Court. The
Court agreed to exercise its jurisdiction
to hear these cases. To ensure that the
most serious offences are heard by the
most senior court in Victoria, the DPP
has directed that sex offence cases that
fit within prescribed guidelines should
be heard in the Supreme Court. The
SSOU’s prosecutors play a central role in
identifying these cases and seeking their
transfer to the Supreme Court. The OPP
welcomes this move by the Court as one
that will greatly reassure victims and
establish precedents for prosecuting and
sentencing in serious sex crimes.
• Changes to special hearings. Special
hearings allow children and cognitively
impaired witnesses in sex offence cases
to attend court just once to have their
evidence pre-recorded. In March 2008,
the Victorian Government introduced
legislation to enable special hearings
39
to be held closer to the trial date. This
will assist the courts to list the same judge
for both the special hearing and the trial,
giving consistency in relation to sex offence
cases. The OPP welcomes this change.
TRAINING ACTIVITIES
The OPP continued to provide training
and information about the SSOU, sex
offence prosecutions and the Sexual
Assault Reform Package to a number
of groups in 2007/08, including Victoria
Police, Victoria Legal Aid, the Leo
Cussen Institute, magistrates, barristers
and sexual assault counsellors.
NEW SEX OFFENCES
UNIT IN GEELONG
During the year, the OPP commenced
planning for a new Specialist Sex Offences
Unit in Geelong. This Unit will adopt a
similar approach to the Melbourne-based
SSOU and will cover Geelong and the
western region (covering cases dealt with
in the Ballarat, Horsham, Hamilton and
Warnambool courts as well as Geelong).
The Unit will comprise three senior
solicitors and a Crown Prosecutor and is
expected to commence operations in 2009.
Through the new Geelong Unit, the
OPP aims to significantly improve the
prosecution of serious sex offences in
regional areas. In particular, the OPP
wants to reduce delays in prosecuting
these matters, create consistency in
prosecutions across the state, increase the
guilty plea rate and reduce the acquittal
rate in regional areas, and improve access
to justice for victims in regional Victoria.
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND
ACCOUNTABILITY
During the course of 2007/08, the SSOU
developed and introduced internal policies
and practices to improve corporate
governance and accountability. In
‘A GREAT START ’
As head of the Specialist Sex Offences Unit and with more than 20
years’ experience as a criminal advocate, Senior Crown Prosecutor
Michele Williams SC is well-placed to assess the OPP’s new
specialised approach to prosecuting sex crimes.
Michele is very pleased with the unit’s first year of operation. “We’ve
really made a great start,” she says. “We still have a long way to go,
but we’re clearly heading in the right direction and we are already
seeing some positive results. For example, our efforts to resolve
matters appropriately at earlier stages mean that we are greatly
reducing the stress experienced by the victims of these offences.”
Michele believes that the proactive nature of the OPP’s new
approach will deliver success as the SSOU develops and matures.
“Overseas experience shows that specialist prosecutors who are
proactive play a critical role in making the criminal justice system
work more smoothly in these types of cases,” she says. “In turn, that
makes the process much less stressful for victims.”
Michele notes that the specialist approach taken by the unit is
already leading to a more consistent approach to the handling of
sex offence cases. “Crown Prosecutors personally cannot prosecute
every single sex crime in Victoria,” she points out. “So a very
important part of our work is to provide training to private barristers to
establish consistency in the prosecution of sex offences right across
the state. We do this to ensure that the sex offence reforms that relate
to the criminal justice system are put into practice, irrespective of who
is prosecuting the case.”
The unit’s growing expertise also means that it is able to put
forward strong arguments for how legislation and policy relating to
sex offences should be developed and implemented. “We intend to
lead the way in this specialist style of prosecuting because we are
in a very good position to see where improvements can be made
across the system,” says Michele.
Michele acknowledges that to be effective in calling for change,
the unit must adopt a high standard of accountability. “We take
very seriously our responsibility to fully document our activities, to
be objective and professional in evaluating what we do, and to be
open to changing direction where we learn that something is not
working,” she says.
As the unit moves into its second year, Michele would like to see
it play a leading role in decreasing the attrition rate for sex offence
matters in Victoria. “Reducing the attrition rate is not only a matter
for the OPP,” she says. “The police, the courts and other agencies
all play a part in making sure that cases proceed. With many of
Victoria’s sexual assault reforms aimed at making the process less
traumatic for victims, I am hoping to see a reduction in attrition rates
as victims gain more confidence in the system.”
‘BEYOND THE COMPREHENSION OF ANY DECENT PERSON’
In August 2006, Mrs R (an 83-year-old woman) was walking with her
daughter along a bike path in Bendigo. Mrs R became separated
from her daughter and was subsequently approached by Mr E on
his pushbike. Mr E, (who was 15 years old at the time), physically
restrained Mrs R and dragged her away from the bike path and
down an embankment beside a creek. Mrs R called out for help and
resisted Mr E, but he continued to assault her in a particularly brutal
manner, including punching her in the head, gouging at her eye,
biting her and sexually assaulting her.
After being confronted by Mrs R’s daughter and a passerby, Mr E
fled the scene. Mrs R’s injuries included facial swelling and bruising,
numerous lacerations to her face requiring stitching, bruising to her
shoulder and chest, lacerations to her breast and cardiac problems
that were not apparent before the assault.
Following his arrest, Mr E pleaded guilty to rape, making threats
to kill, assault and intentionally causing serious injury. At Mr E’s
sentencing hearing in September 2007, Justice Kellam of the
Supreme Court described the offences as “simply beyond the
comprehension of any decent person”. He stated that Mr E had
demonstrated a “profound contempt for [Mrs R’s] dignity as a human
being” and that the attack was “callous in the extreme”.
In sentencing Mr E, Justice Kellam took into account the horrific
and brutal circumstances of the assault, the principle of general
deterrence and Mr E’s age and chances of rehabilitation. He
sentenced Mr E to 13 years’ imprisonment, with a non-parole period
of eight years.
PIONEERING A NEW APPROACH TO PROSECUTING SEX OFFENCES
particular, the unit implemented:
• a process to ensure that cases are
allocated to a solicitor within two
working days of the defendant
being charged
• a systematic briefing procedure
• regular, planned liaison with
key stakeholders.
NEW DIRECTORATE
As part of the reorganisation of the
OPP’s legal functions, the operations of
the SSOU will become one of the newly
created legal directorates. The unit will
continue to oversee the prosecution of
serious sex offences in Melbourne and
regional Victoria, monitor and promote
consistency in the prosecution of these
offences, develop strategies for enhancing
the prosecution of sex offences and actively
drive improvements in the treatment of
these offences in legislation, legal policy
and the criminal justice system. Helen
Fatouros has recently been appointed
Directorate Manager, SSOU. She is looking
forward to starting in her new role during
this exciting time of change in the office.
Kerry Maikousis
Solicitor
Specialist Sex Offences Unit
When the OPP’s Specialist Sex Offences Unit was set up in
2007, Kerry Maikousis knew immediately that she wanted to
be involved. “I saw this as a huge innovation,” says Kerry, “and
I wanted to be part of it.”
Having been an articled clerk and then a solicitor at the OPP,
Kerry returned to take up a position in the unit in May 2007
after a period working for the Judicial College of Victoria,
where she ran training courses for magistrates and judges.
While proud of the SSOU’s success, Kerry points out that
sex offence cases are very complex and often emotionally
draining. “There are times when you think you’ve seen
everything, but you can still get a case that will shock you,” she
says. “Cases can appear straightforward, but then throw up
challenges that you didn’t see coming. The limits are always
being stretched – emotionally and legally.”
One of the most important aspects of Kerry’s work is the
SSOU’s strong focus on supporting victims of serious sex
crimes. “Concern for victims is a philosophy that underpins
our work,” she says. “These are people who are often at a
very low point and we are very conscious that they should not
be victimised a second time by the court process.”
Kerry notes that the strong collegiate atmosphere within
the SSOU is important when working in such a difficult area of
the law. “We operate under lots of different pressures, such as
tight time frames, the volume of cases and the nature of the
work,” she says. “The pace is really pretty intense and doing
this sort of work can wear you down. You need people around
you who are willing to step in and take some of the pressure
off you at certain times – and we have that sort of environment
and understanding in our team.”
Kerry sees prosecuting sex offences as an area where
“you really feel as if you are making a contribution to the
community.” She adds, “It can be tough at times, but I get an
enormous amount of satisfaction from my work.”
41
PIONEERING A NEW APPROACH TO PROSECUTING SEX OFFENCES
Jack Vandersteen
Legal Prosecution Specialist
Early Resolution Advocacy
After 14 months as Manager of the Specialist Sex Offences
Unit, Jack Vandersteen is moving on to a new challenge
as one of the OPP’s newly appointed Legal Prosecution
Specialists – the latest of several positions he has held since
joining the office nine years ago.
Jack is bidding farewell to the SSOU with considerable
regret, but is proud of his part in developing the OPP’s new
approach to prosecuting serious sex offences. “We are
demonstrating that specialisation in prosecutions works,”
he says. “We’re showing that by developing expertise in a
particular area and by being very proactive in resolving cases
that we can drive outcomes – and that has been a pretty big
cultural shift for all involved: our solicitors, Crown Prosecutors,
the private Bar, the police and the courts.”
As the SSOU’s first manager, Jack was involved in
most aspects of setting up the unit, including developing
administrative procedures, establishing guidelines for private
barristers and working with a range of agencies to implement
reforms in the treatment of sex offences. “Our work is really
part of a statewide platform that is much broader than the
OPP,” notes Jack, pointing out that the Victorian Government
has introduced extensive reforms in this area in recent years.
“Everyone is working very hard to make sure these
reforms work,” he says,” and we have had great support
from many quarters – the Victorian Attorney-General, the
Statewide Steering Committee to Reduce Sexual Assault,
Victoria Police, the courts, the Department of Justice, the
Child Witness Service, our own Witness Assistance Service
and many others.”
While prosecuting sex offences is highly demanding, Jack
has a strong personal commitment to working in the area. “I
feel very strongly that this is conduct that we cannot condone
and that the criminal justice system should give the victims
of these crimes the greatest consideration, compassion and
respect in handling these matters,” he says.
As he moves into a new role, Jack believes that the
approach and principles adopted by the SSOU can be applied
with equal success in other areas of prosecutions. “We can
improve the conduct of prosecutions across a number of
fronts,” he says. “For example, if we can reduce delays in the
justice system and avoid the trauma of victims giving evidence
while still achieving high rates of guilty pleas and convictions
– that benefits everyone involved.
“At the OPP, we do our core business of prosecuting well,
but we can do it even better if we conduct that business
as part of a broader policy framework. As the nature of
prosecuting changes, we have to be more prepared to ‘think
outside the square’ and see ourselves as part of the bigger
picture. If we do that, we can achieve outstanding results that
have an impact well beyond individual cases.”
REDUCING DELAYS IN THE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
ADVANTAGES OF EARLY
RESOLUTION
The OPP recognises the many advantages
to the early resolution of matters,
including:
• Victims and witnesses do not have
to endure the stress of delays and
postponements, or the often traumatic
experience of giving evidence in court.
• Compared to contested matters, fewer
resources need to be allocated to
preparing cases by the OPP, the police
and the courts.
• Considerable court time, especially
in the County and Supreme Courts,
is freed up to hear more lengthy and
complex matters.
• With a high percentage of matters listed
for trial ending up as pleas of guilty at
very late stages in the proceedings, the
scheduling of trials is made easier and
the courts’ resources are not wasted in
preparing for trials that do not proceed.
• Critical issues can be resolved at an
early stage, reducing the need for
costly adjournments.
• Where an accused person agrees to
plead guilty, s/he is entitled to argue for a
reduced sentence.
EARLY RESOLUTION
ADVOCACY UNIT
In October 2007, the OPP established the
Early Resolution Advocacy (ERA) Unit.
The Unit comprises five experienced
Solicitor Advocates who have access to a
Crown Prosecutor and a Legal Prosecution
Specialist. These positions have been
integrated into the OPP’s new directorate
structure as part of the advocacy stream.
The Managers of Directorates A
(Complex Crime) and B (Principal
Prosecutions) identify and allocate cases
with the potential to be resolved quickly.
The ERA Unit’s Solicitor Advocates
assess the evidence and identify issues
that may be preventing the case from
being settled. They then negotiate with
the defence and other relevant parties to
achieve an early settlement.
The unit adopts a proactive, specialised
approach to resolving matters at an early
stage. It aims to reduce the time spent by the
courts in hearing contested matters, while
still securing pleas of guilty to appropriate
offences and ensuring that offenders receive
adequate sentences.
The Crown Prosecutor working with
the ERA Unit has the authority to resolve
prosecutions on behalf of the DPP (other
than matters involving homicide or unlawful
death where any early resolution agreement
must be approved by the DPP).
The ERA Unit deals with the full range of
offences, other than serious sex offences. The
early resolution of these offences is managed
by the Specialist Sex Offences Unit.
While the OPP’s prosecutors have
always endeavoured to resolve cases at
an early stage, the creation of the ERA
Unit enables consistent and accountable
processes to be developed across all
prosecutions. The success of this new
specialised approach is reflected in the
fact that around 60 per cent of all cases
handled by the ERA Unit in its first eight
months of operation have been resolved
before committal.
EARLY RESOLUTION ON CIRCUIT
The OPP has dedicated one Solicitor
Advocate to manage the early resolution
of matters assigned to the OPP’s
Western Circuit Section (which conducts
prosecutions when the County and
Supreme Courts sit in Victoria’s western
region). This position, which has been
operating for 15 months, has resulted
in a significant increase in the early
resolution of cases and made a substantial
contribution to reducing court backlogs.
Currently, solicitors working on the
Northern and Eastern Circuits do not have
the benefit of a dedicated early resolution
Solicitor Advocate. However, these sections
are committed to reducing delays and
backlogs in regional cases and adopt a
strong focus on early resolution in the
conduct of prosecutions.
CONTESTED COMMITTALS
/6.#&30'$0/5&454
•
During the year, the DPP and the OPP
played a critical role in reducing waiting
lists and delays in Victoria’s courts. In
particular, the OPP adopted a strong
focus on resolving cases at an earlier
stage through the creation of a new Early
Resolution Advocacy Unit.
The OPP recognises the adverse impact
that delays can have on the criminal justice
system, including a negative effect on the
rights of defendants, greater stress and
trauma for victims, and additional costs to
the Victorian community.
Over the past two years, the Victorian
Government has increased resources to
the OPP and other agencies to reduce case
backlogs and delays in the Magistrates’,
County and Supreme Courts. These
additional resources have enabled the
OPP to improve internal practices and
streamline case management within the
office, as well as work with the courts and
other agencies to minimise delays across
the criminal justice system.
o
o o o o o o o
o :&"3
43
COMMITTALS
The OPP continued to prosecute
indictable offences in the Magistrates’
Court, including committal mentions and
committal hearings. During the year, the
OPP worked with the Magistrates’ Court
of Victoria and Victoria Police to ensure the
success of the new committals procedures
introduced in 2006/07.
The number of contested committals
has fallen for the first time in seven years,
reflecting the OPP’s efforts to resolve
matters at the pre-committal stage.
However, while the creation of the Early
Resolution Advocacy Unit has reduced the
number of cases for prosecutors working
on committals, a growing number of these
cases are becoming increasingly complex
and time consuming.
PROCEDURE CHANGES
The prospects of resolving cases at an early
stage were further enhanced by changes
to criminal procedure introduced by the
Victorian Government through the Criminal
Procedure Legislation Amendment Act 2008.
These changes include:
• Abolishing reserved pleas. At the
conclusion of committal proceedings,
defendants will no longer be permitted to
reserve their pleas: they will be required
to either plead guilty or not guilty.
• Introducing sentence indications and
discounts. Under these changes, the
court will indicate the sentence that it
would have imposed had the defendant
not pleaded guilty. The court will also
identify the amount of a sentence
discount given for a guilty plea. This is
aimed at encouraging defendants to
make their plea decision at an earlier
stage, with more knowledge and
certainty about what sentence they are
likely to receive.
These changes to procedure will have
an impact on the ERA Unit, as well
on the OPP’s conduct of prosecutions
more generally.
REDUCING DELAYS IN THE SUPREME COURT
In 2007/08, the OPP contributed to ensuring that matters proceed
as expeditiously and efficiently as possible in the Supreme Court
of Victoria. In particular, the OPP continued to monitor Section 5
hearings in the Supreme Court, with the aim of identifying and
addressing pre-trial issues in order to reduce trial delays.
The aim of a Section 5 hearing is to inform the Supreme Court
of any progress towards resolving a matter and to ensure that the
trial commences on the proposed or fixed date by identifying at an
early stage any issues that may cause delay. Matters committed
to the Supreme Court for trial must be listed for a Section 5
hearing within 14 days of the completion of the committal hearing
(Practice Note 5 of 2006: Criminal Division – Case Management
by Section 5 Hearings).
Counsel retained for the committal or the trial are required to
appear at the Section 5 hearing and to be in a position to address
a number of matters, including: anticipated issues at the trial
and whether any issues warrant pre-trial hearings; an estimate
of the hearing time needed for the trial; any problems that might
prevent the trial proceeding quickly and smoothly; the number
and availability of witnesses; any security issues; any special
requirements for witnesses; and whether extensive pre-trial
management is required.
The commencement of Section 5 hearings in 2006 raised
significant issues for the operations and resources of the OPP. In
2007/08, the OPP introduced a significant change to its procedures
in relation to these hearings, requiring solicitors to attend and take
full responsibility for Section 5 hearings in the cases assigned
to them. This establishes continuity throughout the conduct of
a particular prosecution, ensures that the court’s questions can
be answered on the day of the hearing and helps to improve the
overall efficiency and effectiveness of these hearings.
Over the past 12 months, the OPP:
• prepared 81 Section 5 hearings
• ensured that counsel appearing at the committal hearing also
appeared at the Section 5 hearing in 85 per cent of matters.
In the remaining 15 per cent of matters, the OPP has ensured
that a replacement Crown Prosecutor appeared where the
committal hearing Crown Prosecutor was unable to appear
(61 per cent of matters); that a Crown Prosecutor appeared
where the matter had proceeded at committal mention without
a committal hearing (9 per cent); and that counsel familiar
with the matter appeared where counsel who appeared at the
committal was unable to appear (30 per cent)
• ensured that presentments were prepared, signed and filed
at Section 5 hearings in more than 93 per cent of matters.
In the remaining 7 per cent of matters, presentments were
not prepared due to ongoing forensic testing or where it
was inappropriate to file presentments as the Crown was
considering offers to alternate offences or nolles prosequi.
These outcomes reflect the strong commitment of the DPP and
the OPP to support the efforts being made by the Supreme Court
to minimise delays and improve the operations of the court.
REDUCING DELAYS IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
“This specialist approach to
early resolution is a significant
change in practice that is
beneficial to the court system,
the criminal justice system,
victims and the community of
Victoria. It requires cooperation
between all parties for it to
work, but it’s a win-win situation
for everyone involved.“
Kieran Gilligan
Crown Prosecutor
CRIMINAL JUSTICE STEERING
COMMITTEE
The DPP and the Solicitor for Public
Prosecutions continued their participation
in the Criminal Justice Steering
Committee, which considers issues
affecting the criminal justice system.
The committee (which includes the
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the
Chief Judge of the County Court, the
Chief Magistrate, the Chief Commissioner
of Victoria Police, the Director of Public
Prosecutions, the Solicitor for Public
Prosecutions, the Managing Director of
Victoria Legal Aid and the Secretary of
the Department of Justice) is currently
overseeing reforms aimed at reducing
delays in the criminal justice system. The
committee’s work includes developing,
facilitating and evaluating initiatives to
reduce delays.
John Dickie
Solicitor Advocate
Early Resolution Advocacy Unit
The opportunity to undertake more advocacy work brought
John Dickie to the OPP in October 2007, following stints
at Victoria Legal Aid and the Commonwealth DPP. Having
appeared in contested committals, County Court pleas and
trials and the Court of Appeal, John believes there are “real
and exciting prospects” at the OPP for further expanding his
advocacy experience.
As a Solicitor Advocate in the OPP’s Early Resolution
Advocacy Unit, John’s main focus is on resolving matters at an
early stage, with the aim of reducing delays across the criminal
justice system. “The OPP is strongly committed to the early
resolution of cases,” says John. “We’ve got a dedicated team
of experienced lawyers that focuses on getting matters settled
quickly. We identify files that are capable of early resolution,
analyse the evidence, narrow down the issues as early as
possible, discuss the file with the police and then open up a
discussion with the defence.”
John sees the formation of the early resolution team within
the OPP as a very positive development. “I think it’s a great
initiative,” he says. “If you’re serious about reducing delays in
the court system, it’s important to be able to make calls about
cases at the earliest opportunity. That means identifying at an
early stage the issues that may be preventing a matter from
settling quickly to appropriate charges. To be successful, you
need to focus on that task quite intently – and that’s what our
team does.”
At present, John’s work with the early resolution team
mainly involves appearances in the Magistrates’ Court.
However, he’s looking forward to being part of the OPP’s
plans to offer greater advocacy opportunities for solicitors.
John believes that the benefits of opening up career paths
in advocacy for solicitors extend beyond individuals. “It’s
also a way to keep experienced people here at the OPP,” he
says. “There are many talented solicitors who are capable of
doing appearance work. If they are encouraged, trained and
supported to do this kind of work, they’re much more likely to
stay with the office.
“That has to be of great benefit not only to the OPP, but also
to prosecutions in general.”
OPPAnnual
AnnualReport
Report2007/08
2007/08 45
45
OPP
SUPPORTING VICTIMS AND WITNESSES
WITNESS ASSISTANCE SERVICE
The OPP’s Witness Assistance Service
(WAS) offers support, advice and assistance
to victims and witnesses of crime in Victoria.
WAS comprises four case managers and two
administrative staff. During 2007/08, WAS
received over 1,600 new referrals to assist
victims and witnesses – a substantial increase
from the 1,300 referrals received in 2006/07.
Services provided by WAS varied
according to the specific needs and
circumstances of victims and witnesses.
In addition to offering clear information
about court procedures and processes,
WAS provided personal support for victims
and witnesses attending court, organised
transport and accommodation when
required, conducted pre-trial conferences
between victims, solicitors and prosecutors,
organised post hearing de-briefings, and
provided referrals to other support services.
During the year, WAS also provided
support for “secondary” victims of crime,
particularly family members. In addition
to its usual workload, WAS provided
support to victims and witnesses in two
high-profile cases. In the Towle case
(where a driver collided with a group
of teenagers in Mildura, killing six and
seriously injuring four people), WAS
provided support to a large number
of secondary victims and witnesses,
including assisting family members find
accommodation in Melbourne after the
case was moved from Mildura.
In the Farquharson case (where the
father of three young boys drove off the
road into a dam, causing the deaths of all
three children), WAS assisted many of the
49 witnesses involved in the trial. These
lengthy cases placed considerable additional
demand on WAS’s resources and staff.
VICTIMS’ CHARTER
In late 2006, the Victorian Government
introduced the Victims’ Charter, which sets
out 12 principles that criminal justice agencies
– such as Victoria Police, victim support
agencies and the OPP – must follow in their
dealings with victims of crime. The Charter
includes a complaints process if victims feel
that these principles have not been followed.
Of particular relevance to the OPP are the
Charter’s requirements that victims are treated
with courtesy, respect and dignity; that they
are given clear and up-to-date information
about their legal rights and the progress of the
case against the accused person; and that they
are informed about court processes, including
their role as a witness.
Throughout 2007/08, the OPP worked
hard to uphold these principles, both within
the culture of the office and by the way
in which staff members carried out their
professional responsibilities on a daily basis.
DIRECTOR’S POLICY AND WEBSITE
INFORMATION
In 2008, for the first time, the DPP
made available the Director’s Policy and
Guidelines on Victims and Witnesses
on the upgraded OPP website. The
publication of the policy will assist in
disseminating information to the Victorian
community about the OPP’s approach
to victims and witnesses, as well as
reinforcing the strong commitment of
the DPP and the OPP to supporting the
victims of serious crimes. The new website
also features a separate section for victims
and witnesses, which includes contact
details for support services, advice and
information about court procedures and
the criminal justice system, and specific
sections that outline how to prepare for a
court appearance and what to expect on
the day of the hearing.
WORKING WITH EXTERNAL
AGENCIES
Throughout 2007/08, the OPP continued
to work with external agencies to improve
support to victims and witnesses.
In September 2007, Victoria’s first
Child Witness Service was opened by
the Attorney-General, Rob Hulls. The
OPP is involved in the Child Witness
Service Advisory Group, which oversees
the development of the service. Based in
the Melbourne court precinct, the service
provides information, education, support
and assistance to child witnesses who
are required to give evidence in court
proceedings. The service complements the
WITNESS ASSISTANCE SERVICE
CASE REFERRALS
$"4&3&'&33"-4
•
believes that a fair and effective
prosecutions service requires that victims
and witnesses are supported and respected
in their experiences with the criminal justice
system. In 2007/08, the OPP received more
than 1,600 referrals to provide support,
information and assistance to victims and
witnesses of serious crimes.
The OPP recognises that most victims
and witnesses have little or no experience
of the criminal justice system and that
this can lead to fear, intimidation and
confusion – with negative impacts not
only upon individuals, but also upon
the administration of a fair and just legal
system. In 2007/08, the OPP continued
to improve its support for the victims
and witnesses of serious crimes and to
incorporate consideration of victims into
Victoria’s prosecution service.
o
o o
o
:&"3
o
o
o
services provided to adults by the OPP and
works with WAS to ensure that all victims
receive appropriate support.
During the year, WAS worked with the
Victorian Court Network, Victoria Police,
Centres Against Sexual Assault, the Victims
Support Agency, the Victims of Crime
Support Agency, the Victims Assistance and
Counselling Program and other support
agencies, providing assistance to victims
and witnesses across Victoria.
SPECIALIST SEX OFFENCES UNIT
WAS provided strong support to the
OPP’s new Specialist Sex Offences Unit
(SSOU) during its first year of operation.
WAS staff worked with SSOU staff in
developing policies and practices to ensure
that appropriate support and information is
provided to victims of serious sex offences.
By improving the support provided
to victims of these offences, the OPP
aims to ensure that more of these cases
proceed to conviction and sentence, and
that victims are encouraged to report
these crimes to police.
NEW VICTIMS STRATEGY AND
SERVICES DIRECTORATE
A new Victims Strategy and Services
Directorate is being established as part
of the reorganisation of the OPP. The
new Directorate will include the Witness
Assistance Service and a number of
additional functions. Creating this
Directorate will reinforce the OPP’s aim of
fully integrating support for victims into its
prosecution practice.
It will also help to create a greater
awareness – within the OPP and across
the wider community – of the importance
of supporting victims and witnesses in the
criminal justice system. It will improve the
capacity of the OPP to promote its victim
support services to external agencies and
consolidate the office’s leadership in this
rapidly expanding area of prosecutions.
Anne O’Brien
Victims Specialist
Witness Assistance Service
Anne O’Brien knows how fortunate she is to be able to say: “I
never don’t want to come to work.” As a Victims Specialist with
the OPP Witness Assistance Service (WAS), Anne finds her
work demanding, interesting and satisfying on a daily basis.
“The variety of the work and the professional satisfaction that
I get from providing legal education, information and support
to people who have never had anything to do with the criminal
justice system is very rewarding,” says Anne.
Anne began work at WAS in 1997, having worked as a
social worker at Oz Child family and children’s services for
five years. In those days, the service was much smaller and
in its infancy, comprising two social workers, Anne and Anni
Davie. Anni, who was head-hunted from NSW DPP’s Witness
Assistance Service, already had extensive experience in the
areas of sexual assault and witness support (including support
for the family in the Anita Cobby case). Anni retired this year
after 13 years with the OPP and Anne is keen to pay tribute to
Anni and her time with WAS. “Anni was an invaluable asset to
the fledgling WAS because of her experience with witnesses
and her passion to change the way in which the criminal
justice system responds to them,” Anne says. ”She was also a
wonderful teacher and mentor to myself and others.”
Since 1997, the service has grown in size, capability
and reputation – thanks to the strong support of previous
Directors of Public Prosecutions (particularly Geoff Flatman
and Paul Coghlan) and through the dedicated work of WAS
staff members.
Anne notes that the work carried out by WAS is not only
important to individual victims and witnesses, it also has a
positive impact on the operation of the courts. “Through the
work we do here and through the support we get from the
rest of the OPP, we are also able to help enhance the quality
of evidence by demystifying the legal system for victims,”
she says.
Anne is particularly excited by current developments at
WAS, with the service about to become part of a separate
Victims Strategy and Services Directorate within the office.
“This is a really positive step forward,” says Anne. “It will assist
us in carrying out our increasing case load, enable WAS to
promote its services throughout the criminal justice system
and demonstrate that what we do here is best practice.
“Victims and witnesses in Victoria can benefit greatly from
this increased profile and focus.”
Anne continues to find her work “tremendously challenging”
and has high praise for her co-workers at WAS. “If we didn’t
have the team we have here, it would not be such a pleasure
to come to work every day,” she says. “But we also feel it is
rewarding and important work. I can see myself working here
for a few years yet – there is a lot to be done.”
47
SUPPORTING MULTIPLE VICTIMS AND WITNESSES
Driving home to Red Cliffs in north-western Victoria in February
2006 after visiting his brother in Cardross (a journey of around four
kilometres), Mr T failed to negotiate a right-hand bend and his vehicle
struck a group of children who were standing to the side of the road.
Six of the children were killed and another four were seriously injured.
Evidence was given at Mr T’s trial that he was observed driving at
a speed “most probably” in excess of the speed limit for the location.
At the time of the accident, Mr T had been driving with his four-yearold child on his lap and had been forewarned by his brother of the
presence of the children at the location. Mr T left the scene of the
accident, handing himself over to police five hours later.
At the committal hearing in Mildura in March 2007, 42 witnesses
were called, including 28 children. Due to concerns about his
safety, Mr T did not attend the hearing in person, but appeared
via a video link. The trial was moved from Mildura to Melbourne to
ensure an impartial jury with no connection to any of the people
involved in the case.
In February 2008, Mr T was found guilty by a Supreme Court jury
of dangerous driving causing death and serious injury. In sentencing
Mr T to a total of 10 years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of
seven years, Justice Cummins stated: “This is a case of multi-faceted
lack of attention at high speed at night and with knowledge of risk
– and with terrible consequences.”
The OPP’s Witness Assistance Service (top) was involved
throughout the trial in providing support, information and advice
to many of the victims and witnesses involved in the case. Anne
O’Brien, Victims Specialist with WAS said that “because of the
nature of this very difficult case, the fact that there were more than
40 witnesses involved and the devastating effect that it had on the
families and friends of those killed and injured, it was critical for WAS
to be able to offer help to many of the young people involved”.
Due to the relocation of the trial from Mildura, witnesses and family
members required assistance with transport and accommodation
costs. “At times, it was a logistical and geographic nightmare
– locating family members and finding sufficient funds to transport
and accommodate them in Melbourne,” said Anne, noting that the
Victorian Government and Qantas provided additional funding and
assistance. “As well, many of the people involved were very young,
understandably traumatised by the trial and without any previous
experience of the processes of the criminal justice system.
It was important for these young people to have a consistent,
supportive and sensitive person to assist them through the trial
process – and while it was difficult at times for WAS in terms of
available resources, we were able to provide this support.”
After Mr T was sentenced, WAS continued to provide information
and support to witnesses and the families involved. “Some of the
young witnesses found it very difficult to understand the court’s
decision and the sentence handed down by Justice Cummins,”
said Anne. “After the case finished, it was important to ensure
that witnesses, victims and families were given proper and clear
information as to the legal reasoning behind those decisions.”
Anne recognises that many people were deeply unhappy with the
outcome in this particular case. However, from her long experience
supporting victims of crime, she believes that providing impartial
advice and information about court processes and decisions
can help to reduce the trauma and stress surrounding criminal
trials. Anne observed: “Even where the desired outcome does not
eventuate, victims and witnesses often do not walk away completely
dissatisfied with the legal system if they have been fully informed and
properly prepared.”
INFLUENCING LEGAL POLICY
AND LAW REFORM
•
The OPP plays a leading role in the
development and modernisation of legal
policy and practice in Victoria – providing
advice to the Victorian Government and
public authorities, engaging in law reform
activities, and developing policies and
strategies related to the criminal law and
the criminal justice system.
Through its Policy and Advice
Directorate, the OPP applies its expertise
and experience in prosecutions to drive
improvements in the criminal law and
in the operations of the criminal justice
system. During 2007/08, the OPP
identified and pursued areas of law
and legal practice in need of reform,
working closely with Victoria Police, the
Department of Justice, the courts, the legal
profession and community groups.
PROCEDURAL REFORM
The OPP makes a substantial contribution
to the successful implementation of the
Victorian Government’s 2004 Justice
Statement and the Strategic Priorities
identified by the Department of Justice for
2007 and 2008.
The OPP continues to work with the
Department in its ongoing review of
Victorian criminal law and procedure, in
line with the commitment given by the
Government in its Justice Statement. In
2007/08, this work included:
• reviewing the grounds of appeals and
section 568(1) of the Crimes Act 1958
• researching the possible introduction of
interlocutory appeals
• reviewing the structure of appeals
against sentence
• making recommendations for the draft
Criminal Procedure Bill.
PRACTICE REFORM
The Policy and Advice Directorate
monitors and analyses emerging
trends in prosecutions. The OPP uses
this information to build expertise in
particular areas of practice, drive greater
consistency in the conduct and outcomes
of prosecutions, ensure that prosecutors
keep up with the latest developments, and
influence the practice of criminal law. In
2007/08, the focus of these efforts included:
• monitoring and analysing sentences in
cases of child homicide
• monitoring the early impact of
the Charter of Human Rights and
Responsibilities and developing protocols
and materials to ensure compliance with
the Charter by prosecutors and the courts
• monitoring the impact of Victoria’s asset
confiscation scheme on the conduct of
prosecutions and testing the relevance of
confiscation orders to sentencing.
The DPP has also indicated that he
wants to see a reduction in the number
of suppression orders being issued in
Victoria, stating that he will argue for
secrecy in court proceedings only in rare
cases where the administration of justice
would be adversely affected or where
a person’s safety is at risk. While the
recent “gangland” and police corruption
trials have contributed to an increase in
suppression orders, the DPP has indicated
that he expects prosecutors to uphold the
principle of open and transparent justice.
The OPP is monitoring the number and
nature of suppression orders to ensure that
the DPP’s concerns are addressed.
LAW REFORM
During the year, the OPP responded to
a wide range of inquiries, reviews and
discussion papers, including:
• the Victorian Law Reform
Commission’s detailed review of the
Bail Act 1977, particularly in relation to
Victoria’s higher courts
• the review of the Coroner’s Act 1985,
especially as it affects the role of the DPP
in assisting the Coroner
• proposals to reform processes under
the Sentencing Act 1991 that enable
victims of crime to seek compensation
from offenders
• proposals to expand the existing
Extended Supervision Order regime for
serious sex offenders to cover a broader
range of offences and to provide a greater
range of supervision and detention
options for the management of high-risk
sex offenders
• the Sentencing Advisory Council’s
review of Suspended Sentences and
other related orders, particularly as these
sentences are used in the higher courts
• the Sentencing Advisory Council’s
review of the penalties applicable to
breaches of Intervention Orders and
related issues, especially as they affect the
safety and welfare of victims
• proposals to streamline the management
of cases in the County and Supreme
Courts, develop criteria for the allocation
of matters between the courts and create
a single criminal list covering both courts
• the Victorian Law Reform
Commission’s review of the law of
abortion in Victoria, which provided
advice to the Attorney-General on
options for the decriminalisation of
terminations of pregnancy
• the Hanks Review of Victoria’s Accident
Compensation Act 1985, particularly in
relation to criminal prosecutions under
the Act, penalties for offences, and search
warrants and obstruction offences
• the Victorian Parliament’s Law
Reform Committee Inquiry into
Vexatious Litigants
• the development of a Justice
Mental Health Strategy by the
Victorian Government
• the development of the Government’s
Justice Statement 2, which will build
on the achievements of the 2004 Justice
Statement and include major reforms in
relation to costs, victims and the better
integration of the courts into the criminal
justice system.
LEGISLATIVE REFORM
During the year, the OPP provided expert
advice and comment on a number of
legislative reforms that will have an impact
on the conduct of prosecutions in Victoria,
including:
• Criminal Procedure Legislation Amendment
Act 2008. This Act introduces changes to
the conduct of criminal cases in Victoria,
including enabling the courts to give
sentencing indications and identify
sentence discounts, and abolishing
reserved pleas.
• Justice Legislation Amendment (Sex Offences
Procedure) Act 2008. This Act makes a
number of changes in relation to sex
offences, including:
– Providing further alternative
arrangements for children and victims
with cognitive impairment giving
evidence in sex offence proceedings
– Amending the Sex Offender
Registration Act 2004 to provide a
lifelong reporting obligation for
persons convicted of persistent
sexual abuse of a child under 16.
49
• Justice Legislation Amendment Act 2008,
which amends the Serious Sex Offenders
Monitoring Act 2005 to:
– expand the category of offences that can
be the subject of Extended Supervision
Orders to include offences committed
against adults
– give the court power to grant interim
Extended Supervision Orders in
appropriate cases
– provide assessing clinicians with
additional powers to request
further reports.
• Crimes Amendment (Child Homicide) Act
2008. This Act makes a number of changes
in relation to serious offences, including:
–creating a new offence of child
homicide, punishable by a maximum
penalty of 20 years’ imprisonment
– Increasing the maximum penalty for
negligently causing serious injury from
5 to 10 years’ imprisonment
– splitting the offences of dangerous
driving causing death or serious
injury into two separate offences, and
increasing the maximum penalty for
dangerous driving causing death to 10
years’ imprisonment.
ADVICE TO EXTERNAL AGENCIES
The OPP continues to be a source of expert
advice and assistance to many external
agencies. In 2007/08, this included:
• advice to the Victorian Attorney-General
regarding the maximum penalty for
the offences of negligently causing
serious injury and dangerous driving
causing death or serious injury, and the
operation of various legislative provisions
relating to sexual offences and defensive
homicide
• advice to Victoria Police on a range
of issues, including sex offence
matters, the operation of the Victims
Charter, mental impairment, informer
management, prosecution appeals and
the management of dangerous exhibits
in court
HUMAN RIGHTS:
AN EVOLVING AREA OF PROSECUTIONS
On 1 January 2008, Victoria’s Charter of Human Rights and
Responsibilities Act 2006 came into full operation. The Charter places
a duty on public authorities to act compatibly with human rights and to
give proper consideration to those rights when they develop policies,
create and enforce laws, provide services and make decisions.
The DPP and the OPP have taken a number of steps to ensure
that Victoria’s prosecution service complies with the Charter. In 2007,
the DPP issued a Director’s Policy that requires all OPP staff to be
mindful of the principles and purpose underlying the Charter as they
conduct the business of the office, including:
• familiarising themselves with the human rights contained in the
Charter and being alert to the possible application of these rights to
the files they are handling
• considering, promoting and supporting the human rights set out in
the Charter in providing advice or making decisions
• dealing expeditiously with all cases referred to the OPP for advice
• conducting all prosecutions without unreasonable delay.
The OPP reviewed internal practices to ensure compliance with the
Charter, as well as ensuring that staff participated in training about
their responsibilities under the Charter. The OPP’s Policy and Advice
Directorate prepared material for solicitors and prosecutors to
develop a consistent approach to Charter issues, provided advice
on whether particular files raised issues relating to the application
or interpretation of the Charter and liaised with the Chief Crown
Prosecutor, the Human Rights Unit of the Department of Justice
and the Victorian Government Solicitor’s Office on matters arising in
relation to the Charter.
The DPP and OPP also dealt with a number of cases that raised
human rights issues, including: freedom of expression: General
Television Corporation v DPP and “A” (Underbelly). Channel 9
appealed against an order of a Justice of the Supreme Court made
on 15 February 2008, which prohibited the publication, broadcasting
or exhibition of the television program Underbelly in Victoria until after
the trial of ‘A’ had been completed. General Television Corporation
Pty Ltd argued that the order was a breach of the right to free
speech. While this ground of appeal was ultimately abandoned, the
court noted that it would have relied upon the view of Richardson
J in Gisborne Herald v Solicitor-General [1995] 3 NZLR 563, 575:
“The present rule is that where on the conventional analysis freedom
of expression and fair trial rights cannot be fully assured, it is
appropriate in our free and democratic society to temporarily curtail
freedom of media expression so as to guarantee a fair trial.”
BAIL APPLICATION
The applicant Mr B was charged with conspiracy to traffic a
commercial quantity of drugs and was required to show exceptional
circumstances in order to be granted bail. During the final
submissions, the defence raised the issue of delay, stating that the
trial was likely to be delayed for two years. As a result, the Charter
of Human Rights and Responsibilities and the recent judgment of
Bongiorno J in the application of Kelly Michael Gray [2008] VSC
4 were discussed. The DPP submitted that the application should
be distinguished on the basis that whilst Bongiorno J accepted that
Gray may well have remained in custody for a period in excess of
his probable sentence, Mr B was likely to be sentenced to a term
of imprisonment well in excess of any potential period of remand.
The Magistrate ruled that whilst Mr B had demonstrated exceptional
circumstances and that the likely delay would be inordinate, the risks
of his re-offending and/or fleeing were unacceptable and could not
be alleviated by strict conditions. Accordingly, bail was refused.
INFLUENCING LEGAL POLICY AND LAW REFORM
• advice, assistance and support
to external agencies involved in
implementing and monitoring major
legislative and operational reforms,
including the Charter of Human Rights
and the Victims Charter.
• developing memoranda of
understanding and protocols with
the following agencies: Child
Witness Service, Asset Confiscation
Office, Commonwealth Director of
Public Prosecutions, Department
of Primary Industries, Environment
Protection Agency, Forensicare, Office
of Corrections, Office of Military
Prosecutions, Office of Police Integrity,
Ombudsman, Transport Accident
Commission and the Victims of Crime
Assistance Tribunal.
PETITION OF MERCY
The OPP worked with the Criminal Law
Policy Branch of the Department of Justice
on the Petition of Mercy sought for Colin
Campbell Ross. Ross was executed for
the rape and murder of schoolgirl Nell
Alma Tirtschke in 1922, despite evidence
that he was innocent. In the 1990s, a reexamination of evidence in the case using
modern forensic techniques supported
the view that Ross was innocent. In 2006,
the Victorian Attorney-General Rob Hulls
submitted a petition to the Chief Justice,
Marilyn Warren, asking her to consider
a plea of mercy for Ross. On 27 May
2008, the Governor of Victoria pardoned
Ross – the first instance of a posthumous
pardon in Victoria’s legal history.
Jennifer Powell
Solicitor
Policy and Advice Directorate
After completing her Arts and Law degrees, Jennifer
Powell worked in the Department of Justice and the Office
of Women’s Policy within the Department for Victorian
Communities. Jennifer was accepted into the articled clerkship
program at the Office of Public Prosecutions in March 2007
and is confident that she has made the right choice for
advancing her legal career.
“I was initially attracted to the OPP because I wanted to use
my legal background more than I had previously,” Jennifer
says. “After working in the office’s County Court Appeals
Section for a while, I applied for a position in the policy and
advice area – and I’ve been on a very steep learning curve
ever since!”
Jennifer’s work involves monitoring changes to the law
and the impact these changes have on OPP policies and
practices. She also advises OPP staff on how legislative
changes and initiatives will affect them. “My work includes
researching discrete legal issues, as well as fielding a variety
of enquiries,” says Jennifer. “For example, we recently gave
advice on a jurisdictional matter concerning the application of
a Victorian Community Based Order in Queensland.”
The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities is
an exciting new area of law in Victoria. Jennifer notes the
challenges involved in keeping up with this emerging area
of legal practice, adding that “it will be interesting to see
how the courts interpret the Charter in the future and the
effect that interpretation will have on the way the OPP
conducts prosecutions”.
To be effective in her work, Jennifer needs an extensive
knowledge of a wide variety of legislation – both in force and
under consideration by parliament. She is currently working on the
upcoming Criminal Procedure Bill, expected to be enacted some
time next year, which will have significant procedural and policy
implications for the OPP. “There is a lot to get your head around,”
says Jennifer. “But I have found people within this unit to be very
supportive and helpful. It is a very experienced team and that has
helped me tremendously in getting on top of the job.”
51
INFLUENCING LEGAL POLICY AND LAW REFORM
OPP REPRESENTATION ON COMMITTEES AND ADVISORY GROUPS
During 2007/08, the OPP was represented on a range of standing committees and advisory groups, and participated in a number of
groups overseeing new developments in the criminal justice system.
COMMITTEE
PURPOSE
CHAIR
Asset Confiscation Project Board
Supervise the review of the Asset Confiscation Scheme
DOJ
Child Witness Service Advisory Group
Oversee implementation of the Child Witness Service
DOJ
CJEP Governance Board
Determine the strategic direction for the future development of CJEP and
monitor progress of CJEP programs
DOJ
CJEP Information Security and
Privacy Committee
Monitor and advice CJEP Governance Board on security and privacy
implications of CJEP IT environments
DOJ
Continued Detention Legal
Working Group
Discuss and develop proposed continued detention models
DOJ
County Court Criminal Users Group
Discuss and resolve issues relating to the County Court’s
criminal jurisdiction
County Court
County Koori Court Reference Group
Oversee the development and implementation of the County Koori Court
County Court
Criminal Justice Enhancement Program
(CJEP) Steering Committee
Oversee information and knowledge management initiatives within the
criminal justice system
DOJ
Criminal Justice System Steering
Committee
Identify and address issues relating to the operation of the
Victorian criminal justice system
DOJ
Criminal Law Justice Statement
Advisory Committee
Implement the Victorian Attorney-General’s Justice Statement
DOJ
Criminal Law Justice Statement
Offences Review Group
Oversee the review of all criminal offences in Victoria
DOJ
Dangerous Exhibits Working Group
Develop cross-jurisdictional protocols on the management of
dangerous exhibits
Supreme Court
Expediting Evidentiary Procedure
and Analysis Steering Committee
Develop an interagency approach to managing indictable drug cases
Victoria Police
Forensic Nurses Network Advisory
Committee
Oversee the Forensic Nurses Project which forms part of the DOJ
Sexual Assault Reform Package
DOJ
Forensic Services Advisory Board
Consultation and advice to Victoria Police Forensic Services Department
on strategic direction
Victoria Police
Human Rights Litigation Strategy
Identify and develop strategies to address the impact of the Charter of
Human Rights and Responsibilities on prosecutions
Victorian Government
Solicitor
Implementation Coordination Group
Oversee the implementation of the Evidence Bill (Act) and the Crimes
Procedure Bill (Act)
DOJ
Judicial College of Victoria MultiDisciplinary Steering Committee
Develop a sexual assault training package and education framework
Judicial College of Victoria
Law Institute of Victoria –
Criminal Law Committee
Discuss matters relating to the practice of criminal law in Victoria
Law Institute
Melbourne Magistrates’ Court
Criminal Court Users Group
Discuss and resolve issues relating to the Magistrates’ Court criminal
jurisdiction
Melbourne Magistrates’
Court
Mutual Assistance Act Liaison
Officers Group
Respond to requests for mutual assistance from other countries
Commonwealth
Attorney-General
OPP/Victoria Police Consultative Forum
Discuss issues of mutual concern to OPP and Victoria Police
Victoria Police
Policing Just Outcomes Reference Group
Provide support and advice for ARC project aimed at improving police
responses to adult sexual assault in Victoria
University of Melbourne
Sexual Assault Advisory Committee
Discuss and have input into implementation and delivery of sex offence
reforms in the criminal justice system
DOJ
Sexual Assault Steering Committee
Oversee and coordinate reforms to the criminal justice system to address
sexual assault
DOJ
Statewide Steering Committee to
Reduce Sexual Assault
Advise the Victorian Government on improving responses to sexual assault
Victoria Police and Office
of Women’s Policy
Therapeutic Treatment Board
Evaluate and advise on services available for children in need of therapeutic
treatment (aged 10 years and under 15 years old) and advise on the
appropriateness of the application for a therapeutic treatment order
DHS
Victims’ Charter Executive
Steering Committee
Oversee the implementation of the Victims’ Charter
DOJ
Victorian Law Reform Commission
Bail Advisory Group
Provide advice to the Commission’s review of the Victorian Bail Act
VLRC
Victorian Sentencing Manual
Editorial Committee
Oversee updates to the online Victorian Sentencing Manual
Judicial College of Victoria
BUILDING A DISTINCTIVE, HIGH-PERFORMING
PROSECUTION PRACTICE
•is undertaking
a major, multi-year
organisational change program that aims
to enable the OPP to better respond to the
changing demands of the criminal justice
system and to position the office as a
distinctive, high-performing legal practice.
As the nature of prosecutions changes,
the OPP must continue to deliver a high
quality prosecution practice within a rapidly
evolving environment. During the year,
the OPP continued to reorganise, upgrade
and expand its legal practice and corporate
functions to ensure that it has the capability
to meet the challenges ahead.
OPP ORGANISATIONAL
CHANGE PROGRAM
The OPP continued to implement the
major organisational change program that
commenced in 2006/07. The program’s
objectives include:
• establishing a modern prosecutions legal
practice able to respond to the changing
needs of the criminal justice system and
the priorities of government
• ensuring that the special independent
role of the Director of Public
Prosecutions is properly supported
• providing an organisational structure
and processes that better support
initiatives around reducing delays and
early intervention
• creating processes and a culture that
strongly support OPP’s partners in
the criminal justice system, as well as
witnesses and victims
• providing improved career satisfaction
and opportunities for staff and
capturing their skills and knowledge
to drive improvements in the criminal
justice system
• establishing an organisation with which
members of the private Bar are keen to
work and where the standards expected
of the Bar are clear.
The program’s scope is extensive and
touches all areas of the OPP’s legal and
corporate functions. It encompasses
specific projects and activities and includes
significant changes to the office’s structure,
systems, business strategy, technology and
people management.
Changes to the OPP’s legal practice
have been based on the report “A Blueprint
for Effective, Efficient and Economical
Prosecutions” – the result of a major review
undertaken by an external consultant
between October 2006 and April 2007.
During 2007/08, the organisational
change program focused on:
• developing the concept design
recommended by the Blueprint report
into an operational model
• developing a phased implementation
program for the operational model
(commencing in March 2008 and
scheduled for completion in August 2008)
• reviewing work areas and processes
that were not the subject of the
Blueprint report, but where the need
for significant change was highlighted
by the report (such as victims’ services
and administrative support to the
OPP’s legal practice).
Key elements of the design and new
approach to the OPP’s prosecution
service include:
• Separation of management responsibilities
in the office’s legal practice from the
responsibilities of being a legal specialist,
which aims to ensure that managers
receive better support in managing staff,
while allowing the OPP’s legal specialists
to develop their own and staff expertise
in key areas of law.
• Development of legal specialists in a
number of key and emerging areas of law,
consistent with the increasing complexity
of cases and the Victorian Government’s
commitments in certain areas (such as
organised crime).
• Case management and early intervention
approach to prosecution cases whereby
each matter entering the office is
assessed by a senior manager and then
allocated to a solicitor who retains
responsibility for the matter throughout
the prosecution. The assessment
considers a number of criteria including
risk, complexity, workload impact,
early resolution potential, need for the
confiscation of proceeds of crime and
issues relevant to victims and witnesses.
• Creation of a new model of advocacy, enabling
in-house solicitors to appear as advocates
in a wider variety of court proceedings,
including more complex matters.
• Improvment of career opportunities for staff
through the introduction of a business
model that enables individual solicitors
to develop legal specialities, as well as
gain exposure to diverse areas of law.
A new administrative support structure
will provide a career path for staff and
improve support for the core business of
the OPP.
• Stronger management of the private Bar
briefings process through improved
processes within the office and
significantly enhanced contract
management practices.
The OPP has created two new executive
positions to provide support to the
Solicitor: a Legal Practice Manager (who is
responsible for the OPP’s legal practice),
and a General Manager Corporate
Services (who is responsible for the office’s
corporate functions). These positions were
filled during the year.
During 2008/09 the organisational
change program will involve implementing
the final stage of the new structure
and business model, and the new
administrative support structure. The
program will also implement and further
develop the new advocacy model and
associated training program. It will
establish new governance arrangements
for the office, including a new leadership
group – the Strategic Management Group
– which will commence early in 2008/09.
BETTER VALUE FROM BRIEFING
The office recognises the need to obtain
maximum accountability and value from
this very substantial expenditure.
During the year, following a
comprehensive review of briefing practices,
the OPP introduced a new briefing
structure that aims to improve the office’s
engagement with the Victorian Bar, ensure
that service levels remain high and that
consistently good outcomes are obtained
for victims of serious crimes. The new
structure includes:
• a new Briefing Services and Appeals
Directorate with responsibility for
managing the OPP’s briefing practices
• a new, more competitive fee structure for
the private Bar
• a Service Level Charter that sets out
the OPP’s expectations and obligations
when briefing private barristers,
including requirements to be familiar
with the Victims Charter and Charter for
Human Rights and Responsibilities
• a new Case Assignment Rating system
that ranks and assigns matters according
to their complexity
• a new Counsel Advisory Group,
which allocates more complex cases
to counsel and ensures an appropriate
match between the Crown Prosecutor
or barrister and the particular trial in
question (in terms of their experience
and expertise)
• a proactive approach to attracting new
members of the Bar to prosecutions
(which has already led to more than 60
53
BUILDING A DISTINCTIVE, HIGH-PERFORMING PROSECUTION PRACTICE
applications from barristers who have
not previously taken OPP briefs)
• new briefing contracts, better monitoring
and reporting procedures, and improved
invoicing and payment systems
• new internal briefing processes to
centralise briefing decisions and to
ensure consistent consideration is given
to the preparation required and the
experience of counsel required.
AN EMPLOYER OF CHOICE
Over the past two years, the OPP has
undertaken a major recruitment drive
to ensure that the office has the skills,
experience and expertise to continue to
deliver a high quality prosecution service.
As this drive proceeds, it is essential
for the OPP to remain an “employer of
choice”, able to offer a modern work
environment, strong career prospects,
ongoing professional development and
opportunities to achieve a better worklife balance. As well as improving work
environments and HR practices, the
OPP has been increasingly focused on
developing working conditions that are
flexible and family friendly. As part of
that focus, the office endeavours to create
opportunities for part-time employment
and arrangements that involve job-sharing
or working from home.
A number of staff have taken up these
opportunities, from both the legal and
corporate sides of the office. For the first
time in 2007/08, a senior legal position is
being job-shared, with Louise Wilkinson
and Julie Carpenter sharing the position
of Program Manager and now Legal
Prosecution Specialist (see page 32).
Angela Rankin is another solicitor
who has taken up the option of a more
flexible workplace arrangement. Angela,
a solicitor in the Principal Prosecutions
Directorate, works from home one day a
week. Angela has a small child and says
that “without the flexibility provided by
the OPP, I would not be able to work
Kay Idda
Human Resources
Project Officer
Kay Idda has only been with the OPP for a year but says
that “the last 12 months have been challenging and exciting
at the same time”. While Kay has worked for a number of
government agencies, she has found it “particularly rewarding
working at the OPP under a leadership that is prepared to
embrace change and move things forward”.
Kay’s position of Human Resources Project Officer means
that since arriving at the OPP, she has been responsible for
coordinating and implementing the human resources aspects
of the major reorganisation underway within the office. “There
have been significant changes in the office structure – and
major change like this is always hard,” says Kay. “But in my
view, it is change for the good and it will help to develop the
OPP into a modern legal practice that can provide leadership
in areas of law reform and legal policy, as well as continuing to
deliver excellence in our core business of prosecutions.”
Having previously worked at the Magistrates’ Court, the
County Court and the Supreme Court, Kay is very accustomed
to working within the criminal justice system. Prior to joining the
Department of Justice, Kay worked in human resources with a
Registered Training Organisation after completing a Diploma
of Business at Victoria University.
“I am passionate about HR and I am passionate about
this organisation,” Kay says. “It’s also important for me to be
working on issues which make a difference to society and to
contribute to and be part of that change.”
Kay believes that the reorganisation of the OPP will result
in a more transparent and accountable structure that splits
management and legal expertise roles within the office
into two distinct areas. This new structure “makes the best
use of people’s skill sets by allowing those who manage
to manage and those who provide legal expertise to do so
– both internally and externally to other stakeholders within the
criminal justice system,” says Kay. “It also increases the ability
of the OPP’s human resources section to support and assist
the operations and day-to-day running of the central legal
functions of this office.”
Kay would like to continue working at the OPP “for as long
as they will have me”. She adds: “In the last year, I think I have
grown and developed both professionally and personally. It
has been a great experience and I would like to be involved in
the future directions of the OPP in the years to come.”
full time”. In the past, with child-care
placements difficult to obtain, Angela
has been forced to work part time.
Angela has previously worked in
private practice where she has found
work conditions to be less progressive
than at the OPP, with much less support
for flexibility or for achieving a worklife balance. “The OPP really is family
friendly,” she says, “and that was
certainly not the case in private legal
practice.” Angela believes that everyone
benefits from more flexible working
arrangements: “Working from home
enables me to do my work, the office gets
the advantage of an additional day’s work
capacity out of me and it also allows me
to spend more time with my son.”
INCREASED RESOURCES AND A
NEW OFFICE IN GEELONG
The Victorian Government provided a
further increase in funding for the OPP in
the 2008/09 State Budget, with the office’s
operational budget increasing by around
$3.5 million in the 2008/09 financial year.
The office also received $1.5 million in
additional capital funding.
These additional resources include
specific funding to establish the OPP’s first
permanent regional office in Geelong. The
OPP has commenced planning for the
new office, which will focus on prosecuting
serious sex offences in Victoria’s western
region. The office will be located in the
new Transport Accident Commission
facility and is expected to open in 2009.
The OPP is also significantly upgrading
its facilities within the Geelong court
complex, working with court staff to
improve IT connectivity, security and
reprographic capacity, and to ensure
compliance with occupational health and
safety and disability access regulations.
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
The OPP continued to upgrade its
corporate governance framework,
MOVING WITH THE TIMES: THE OPP LIBRARY
As the nature of prosecuting has changed, so too have the demands
on the Office of Public Prosecutions’ library. As well as keeping
up with the expanding range of matters being prosecuted, the
library faces new challenges in managing advances in the use of
information and communications technologies.
Library Manager Adriaan Bendeler notes that, while continuing to
provide specialist legal information and reference materials to assist
the DPP, Crown Prosecutors and OPP staff, the library’s resources
now include both print and digital materials that can be accessed
from the library directly or via online intranet facilities – a development
that has broadened the library’s range of resources and boosted its
capacity to provide accurate, current information.
Adriaan joined the OPP in 1990, after working in senior roles at
the Box Hill Regional Library and RMIT and Swinburne libraries,
and points out that the changes over the years have included
improvements in the library’s physical facilities, as well as a much
greater use of electronic resources. “When I first came to the OPP
there was no real library to speak of – the office was split between
two buildings and each of those buildings contained very small
reference libraries with little coordination between them and much
doubling up of material,” says Adriaan. “So you can certainly say that
we have come a long way since those days.”
Since joining the OPP, Adriaan has been closely involved in many
of the major changes that have taken place across the office. In
1995, the OPP commenced operation of its first PC network, with
internet and intranet facilities being introduced in 1998. “For the very
first time, this allowed us to develop online research tools and to
subscribe to online legal information resources,” says Adriaan.
Recognising the growing demands on the library, the OPP recently
employed a second senior librarian, Tracey Archer. Tracey came to
the OPP following four years with the Victoria Police Forensic Services
and is very familiar with operating within a legal framework.
Tracey has been impressed with the dedication of the OPP staff
and the important role the office plays within the Victorian community.
“It has been a challenge coming to a different specialist library,
but I like new challenges,” says Tracey. “So far, it has been a very
rewarding experience. Whatever I’m doing, whether it is fielding
enquiries, cataloging, maintaining the unreported judgments
database or researching the history of specific legislation, it’s very
satisfying to feel that you are in the middle of something important.”
Adriaan and Tracey see the central role of the library as supporting
the legal expertise of the OPP’s legal and management staff. “We
assist and direct people to the relevant legal information, whether
that’s online resource material, relevant legislation, loose-leaf services
or law reports,” says Adriaan. “It’s about getting at the law – knowing
what is available and where to look.”
With much legal publishing now in digital format, the library
continues to expand its online legal resources. As OPP staff
become more comfortable and conversant with the online services
and electronic information available, more information will be
provided in this manner. Future challenges include the planning and
implementation of an online virtual archive and the expansion of what
Adriaan calls “an in-house online portal”, which will further improve
access to electronic resource material.
The library’s resources must also reflect the increasingly varied
matters being prosecuted. Adriaan and Tracey are very aware of
these challenges, but are confident they can stay “one step ahead”
in locating and providing legal information. “The central role of
this office is prosecuting. In order to do this in a professional and
productive manner, the OPP prosecutors and legal staff require
accurate, relevant and up-to-date legal resource material,” says
Adriaan. “That is what we aim to provide at the OPP library and that’s
where our efforts and resources will continue to be directed.”
55
including:
• developing a Legal Risks Register, which
outlines major potential risks for the
OPP in the legal and corporate areas and
outlines risk management strategies
• conducting an internal audit of the
office’s Risk Management Framework
to ensure compliance with relevant
standards and legislation
• continuing to review and improve the
accuracy, collection and analysis of statistics
relating to the office’s legal practice.
PROJECTS AND PERFORMANCE UNIT
During the year, a new Projects and
Performance Unit was created within the
OPP. The Unit’s responsibilities include:
• assisting other sections of the OPP to
develop and manage specific projects
(including creating mechanisms to
collect and analyse data, establishing
new policies and procedures, and
setting and monitoring performance
targets)
• compiling business cases and bids for
funding for projects
• assisting other sections to audit or
review projects and processes
• supporting other sections to identify
and set key performance indicators to
monitor and improve performance
• reviewing areas of high risk and
Frank Mattea
Assistant to the Manager
Learning and Development
Having been with the OPP for 16 years, Frank Mattea brings
extensive knowledge and experience to his present position
with the office’s learning and development section. Frank’s
background is almost certainly unique within the OPP, having
trained as a physicist and then teaching for some years before
moving into information technology (IT) and coming to work at
the office in 1992.
identifying initiatives or projects to
minimise risk
• ensuring consistency in administrative
processes, management policies and
procedures, and monitoring and
measurement practices across projects
managed by the OPP.
The Unit is also responsible for strategic
planning processes within the OPP and for
reporting on the office’s performance.
COMMUNICATIONS
Recognising the increased media and public
scrutiny to which the DPP and the OPP
are now subject, the office significantly
enhanced its communications capability
Frank sees his primary responsibility as supporting the
OPP’s solicitors to prosecute in court and says that he is
often “the first port of call” when there are problems to be
solved. “My day-to-day tasks are varied in nature to say
the least,” Frank says. In 2007/08, he was responsible for
running the OPP’s Articled Clerk Induction Course and
monitoring the performance of the new articled clerks as
they rotated through different sections within the office. Due
to a temporary vacancy, he also acted as manager of the
learning and development section for the greater part of the
last financial year.
Within the course of a day, Frank will often find himself
organising and coordinating a legal education seminar,
creating presentment documents for court, dealing with
an IT query or computer interface problem, interpreting
spreadsheets for Victoria Police or producing a PowerPoint
presentation for use in court or within an education workshop.
Frank also organises tours of other agencies within
the justice system for articled clerks and interested staff
members. The ongoing legal education and staff training
within the OPP requires constant focus, organisation and
time, and Frank expects this component of his work to
continue to grow in the future.
While the diversity of Frank’s work can be testing at times,
he’s sure of one thing: it’s never dull. “Sometimes, it can be
a challenge keeping your head above water,” he says, “but it
is rarely boring in here. Whatever the problem, you just have
to deal with it and resolve it. There’s no point in resisting a
tsunami – you just have to get on your surfboard and go with
it. Of course, there is one tiny problem with the tsunami-surfing
metaphor – I can’t swim.”
and activities in 2007/08, including the
appointment of a Senior Communications
Adviser reporting directly to the Solicitor.
The OPP website was extensively
upgraded, including making available
online for the first time information about
the processes involved in decisions made
by the DPP and the OPP. The office also
improved its internal communications,
including the production of a regular HR
Newsletter (which includes information
about recruitment, OH&S issues and other
HR matters) and Team Brief newsletter
(which keeps staff informed about
performance, legal policy and process
developments within the office).
A BETTER WORK ENVIRONMENT
The OPP continued to improve the physical
working environment for staff and ensure
that they have access to the equipment
needed to meet their responsibilities.
Activities in 2007/08 included:
• upgrading security within the Bourke
Street premises to make them more
“user friendly” and to ensure staff safety
• installing video conferencing and
meeting room facilities on the ground
floor in the Lonsdale Street premises
• implementing the Office Max stationery
ordering system, which allows automatic
streamlining of office stationery
requirements. This upgrade also involved
Adriana Civitella
Manager – Operations
Briefings Services
For Adriana Civitella, one of the most enjoyable aspects of her
work as Manager Briefing Operations is dealing with a wide
range of people and issues on a daily basis. “I work with a lot
of people from within the OPP and externally every day,” she
says. “So it means there is tremendous variety in both the
content of my work and in the kinds of people I work with.”
Having been at the OPP for 20 years and worked in a
number of positions, Adriana has seen a lot of changes.
“When I first arrived here the office operated in a less systemic
the installation of stationery cupboards
on each floor of the office
• upgrading kitchenette facilities on each
floor and installing new, more waterefficient dishwashers
• continuing to progressively convert
the OPP fleet to more fuel efficient
four-cylinder vehicles and install gas
conversions on a number of cars
• upgrading facilities in the OPP’s Audio
Visual Unit, including a new seminar
room and increased office space for
additional staff.
The office also employed an IT manager
to organise the OPP’s use of a number of
existing Department of Justice IT systems,
way,” she says. “Many of the improvements over the years
have been due to changes in technology but the office has
also progressively become more professional over the years.”
Adriana and her section are responsible for ensuring that
there is a barrister (either from Crown Prosecutors’ Chambers
or from the private Bar) or an OPP advocate at every court
hearing when required. “It is a very important part of the
office,” she says. “If we miss something, there are serious
consequences. Sometimes the listing of a case may change
with very short notice and we just have to find a solution, no
matter what.”
A central part of Adriana’s position is her role with the
Counsel Advisory Group, which allocates the more complex
cases to counsel. In these matters, it is especially important
to achieve an appropriate match between the prosecutor or
barrister and the particular trial in question. Adriana observes
that matching these cases with the relevant expertise and
experience of counsel “requires a knowledge of the people
concerned and the matter at hand – things that you build up
over many years”. She adds: “At the same time, we also have
to focus on succession planning when allocating matters to
the junior Bar – making sure that we have young barristers
coming through who understand our requirements. So there’s
quite a bit to think about.”
Adriana believes that the reorganisation of the office will
contribute to a more uniform and more efficient system by
which cases are allocated. “It has already assisted in making
the operations of the office more productive, more professional
and more transparent,” she says. “With the office now having
implemented a structure that meets the requirements of a
modern briefing service, it sets the OPP up well for the future.”
57
improve efficiencies and create a more
productive IT interaction between the
two organisations.
OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
AND SAFETY
In recent years, the OPP has made
significant efforts to improve occupational
health and safety within the office. In
2007/08, the office:
• established a Health and Wellbeing
Program, recognising the stressful
nature of work undertaken by many staff
within the office; this program includes a
number of services delivered by a private
provider, including workplace visits to
enable staff to discuss issues of concern,
group or individual debriefings and
individual staff counselling
• audited the OPP’s premises for
compliance with relevant building-based
safety measures and OH&S standards,
including a review of all fire/emergency
facilities in both buildings
• restructured and re-established the
OPP’s OH&S Committee to ensure that
office OH&S standards continue to meet
the highest industry standards
• completed a major review of workloads.
Carried out by an independent
consultant, the review recommended
that the office take steps to improve
the physical infrastructure of the office
and address the resourcing of the OPP
in critical areas; improve work systems
so that resources are optimally applied;
and develop an appropriate professional
development program. The OPP is
implementing a number of the review’s
recommendations.
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
AND C.L.E
During the year, the OPP upgraded
its capacity to deliver a high quality
professional development program to staff
by appointing a Manager of Learning and
Development.
The OPP provided a variety of
professional development, training and
education opportunities for staff. The
Continuing Legal Education program
included workshops and presentations
by senior OPP staff and speakers
from external organisations, including
the private Bar, Victoria Police, the
Department of Justice and the courts.
Induction sessions were conducted
for newly appointed staff and a number
of learning and development initiatives
were developed to support newly
appointed Directorate Managers and Legal
Prosecution Specialists. Training sessions
were conducted to inform managers
within the office about the OPP’s
Performance Management system and
help them to develop the skills needed to
support the system.
ARTICLED CLERKSHIP PROGRAM
In 2007/08, the OPP again offered a
comprehensive Articled Clerkship
Program. In 2008, five law graduates
completed their articles and were offered
ongoing employment with the OPP. Nine
new clerks commenced their articles in
March 2008.
In 2009, Victoria will replace the
current articles system with a new
12-month Supervised Workplace
Training (Traineeship) placement, which
includes prescribed minimum training
requirements. The OPP will offer a 12month Legal Traineeship Program to law
graduates in 2009.
ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE:
TRANSFORMING PROSECUTIONS
PRACTICE
While protesters arrested at the G20
Summit demonstrations in Melbourne in
November 2006 probably knew they were
being filmed by TV news cameras, few
would have thought that sophisticated
audio-visual evidence would be used to
secure their convictions two years later. But
59
the OPP’s successful use in the G20 case of
a motion-tracking system to prepare DVD
evidence for the court is just one example
of how advanced audio-visual technology
is changing the way evidence is gathered,
analysed and presented in the criminal
justice system.
While audio recordings have long
been used in courtrooms, criminal justice
systems around the world are now dealing
with a growing range of audio, image
and visual evidence being generated from
a number of sources. On a daily basis,
crimes ranging from theft and assault to
homicide are being captured by audiovisual devices – from mobile phones and
telecommunications recording services
(such as voice mail) through to web cams
and security cameras in public places and
private venues.
As well as recording criminal acts,
audio-visual technologies are also driving
change in the daily operation of Victoria’s
courts. Increasingly, video conferencing is
being used to provide testimony by victims
(particularly children) and by witnesses
(such as protected witnesses, expert
witnesses and interstate or international
witnesses). More sophisticated systems
are now needed in courtrooms to ensure
the accurate reproduction of electronic
evidence. In addition, as audio-visual
evidence becomes more common, it is
more likely to be challenged or subject
to examination by experts – requiring
prosecutors to have a greater knowledge of
audio-visual technologies and systems.
These technologies have the potential to
transform many aspects of prosecuting –
and the OPP recognises that being a leader
in prosecutions practice means staying at
the forefront of these developments. At a
technical level, this means maintaining a
high standard in all aspects of managing
and presenting audio-visual evidence,
including the enhancement of evidence
through techniques such as audio filtering
and motion-tracking.
In 2007/08 the OPP’s successful
submission to the Victorian Government
resulted in additional funding of $1.3
million in the coming financial year and
$400,000 on an ongoing basis to upgrade
audio-visual facilities within the office.
For Rod Hume, Manager of the OPP
Audio Visual Unit, this is “great news for
audio-visual productions within the OPP,
great news for the OPP generally and great
news for the criminal justice system in
Victoria”.
As Rod notes: “Technology is changing
rapidly in the legal justice system in Victoria
and we have to keep up with those changes.
The additional funds we’ve received from
the government mean that the OPP will
stay ahead of the game, resulting in much
clearer and stronger evidence presented to
juries by prosecutors.”
Victoria Police also received funding
from the Victorian Government to convert
old and outmoded analogue equipment to
state-of-the-art digital facilities. This will
allow the police to produce clearer, more
accurate and more useful audio-visual
evidence than was possible previously. It
will also result in a larger workload for the
OPP Audio Visual Unit. “This technical
change alone has tripled our work load in
transferring this data to a court presentable
format,” says Rod. “Fortunately, our
additional funding this coming year will
enable us to purchase the AVID Unity ISIS
media network system – and this latest
technology will singlehandedly address a
number of these issues.”
The additional funding will also allow
the Unit to allocate more resources and
staff hours to working on the dramatic
increase in the use of CCTV (closed
circuit television) in evidence against
accused persons. “In a visual world, more
enterprises are using CCTV to monitor
both public and private areas under
their domain – and this has resulted
in the legal justice system using this
technology more and more as evidence
in court,” says Rod. “It’s our job in this
Unit to make that evidence usable in court
presentations. Clearer evidence assists
clearer legal arguments in court – and that
potentially can result in more successful
prosecutions.”
The clarity of audio-visual evidence was
certainly an important element in the G20
prosecutions. Crown Prosecutor Chris
Beale says that the motion-tracking system
used by the OPP enabled a much clearer
identification of those charged with offences:
“From hundreds of hours of TV footage, the
OPP’s Audio Visual Unit was able to track
each accused person and put together a ‘best
of’ DVD, showing very clearly where each
person was and what they were doing at
various points in the riot.
“Being able to present that very clear
evidence had a substantial input into
securing guilty pleas from a significant
number of defendants. I used the DVD in
my closing address during the committal
hearing and we also tendered the raw
footage as evidence.”
Chris notes that the availability of
the DVD evidence was appreciated by
the magistrate hearing the case. “The
magistrate set aside two days to watch the
DVDs and she gave a ringing endorsement
of them, saying they were very helpful
without compromising her independence.”
ANNUAL REPORT OF
THE COMMITTEE FOR PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
61
REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE FOR
PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
•
The Committee for Public Prosecutions
is a committee established by section 42 of
the Public Prosecutions Act 1994 (the Act).
The Committee provides general advice
on the operation of the prosecutorial
system and also has a number of specific
functions as outlined in the Act.
The specific functions include the
establishment of various guidelines.
These comprise guidelines relating to
appearance work by Office of Public
Prosecutions staff, guidelines on the
treatment of victims of crime by the
prosecutorial system, and guidelines
on the circumstances under which
some decisions are not to be considered
“special decisions” under the Act.
As at 30 June 2008, the Committee
members were:
• Jeremy Rapke QC – Director of Public
Prosecutions (Chairperson)
• Gavin Silbert SC – Chief Crown
Prosecutor
• Stuart Ward – Acting Solicitor for Public
Prosecutions
• Colleen Pearce – a person appointed by
the Governor in Council and Victoria’s
Public Advocate.
The Committee met three times during
the reporting period and discussed the
development of the guidelines noted above.
On 28 April 2008 the Committee for
Public Prosecutions issued two new
guidelines pursuant to its powers under
section 43(1)(d) and (e) of the Public
Prosecutions Act 1994.
In relation to appearance work by OPP
staff, the Committee issued guidelines
on the circumstances in which members
of staff employed in the Office of Public
Prosecutions may appear in court. The
guidelines allow solicitors who have not
completed the Office of Public Prosecutions
Advocacy Training Course, or equivalent,
to appear in court in circumstances which
otherwise would be in breach of the
guidelines, where they satisfy the Director
that they are suitably qualified.
The Committee also amended the
guideline affecting when the decision to
enter a nolle prosequi, or not take steps
under section 353(2) of the Crimes Act
1958, is to be treated as a special decision.
Under the new guideline, a decision to
enter a nolle prosequi or not take steps will
only be a special decision in the following
three circumstances:
1. The decision is in relation to an offence
with a prescribed Level 1 penalty (life
imprisonment).
2. The decision is in relation to a matter of
high public profile or notoriety.
3. The decision is one which, for any other
reason, the Director believes should be a
special decision.
In practice, the new guideline should
reduce the number of nolle prosequi
applications that fall within the definition
of a special decision.
In the coming year, the Committee
intends to develop guidelines and
protocols regarding the giving of advice
by Office of Public Prosecutions staff
to external agencies. The Committee
will continue to review the guidelines
regarding victims of crime. The Committee
will also investigate the need to develop
guidelines in relation to the delays in drug
cases.
JEREMY RAPKE QC
Director of Public Prosecutions
STUART WARD
Acting Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
GAVIN SILBERT SC
Chief Crown Prosecutor
COLLEEN PEARCE
Appointed by the
Governor in Council
This report comprises the 2007/08 Annual Report of the
Committee for Public Prosecutions in accordance with section 45
of the Public Prosecutions Act 1994.
FINANCIAL REPORT
CONTENTS
Accountable Officer’s Declaration
64
Summary Of Financial Performance
64
Operating Statement
65
Balance Sheet
66
Statement of Changes in Equity
67
Cash Flow Statement
67
Notes to the financial statements
Note 1
Summary of accounting policies
68
Note 2
Output of the Office
71
Note 3
Net result from operations
71
Note 4
Remuneration of auditors
72
Note 5
Receivables
72
Note 6
Property, plant and equipment
73
Note 7
Payables and accruals
75
Note 8
Interest bearing liabilities
75
Note 9
Provisions
76
Note 10 Superannuation
77
Note 11 Equity and movements in equity
78
Note 12 Commitments for expenditure
78
Note 13 Contingent liabilities and contingent assets
78
Note 14 Leases
79
Note 15 Responsible persons
80
Note 16 Remuneration of executives
81
Note 17 Notes to cash flow statement
81
Note 18 Financial instruments
82
Accountable Officer’s and Chief Finance
and Accounting Officer’s Declaration
85
Auditor General’s Report
86
Attestation on compliance with the
Australian/New Zealand Risk Management Standard
88
63
OFFICE OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS FINANCIAL REPORT
For the financial year ended 30 June 2008
ACCOUNTABLE OFFICER’S DECLARATION
In accordance with the Financial Management Act 1994, I am pleased to present the Report of Operations for the Office of Public
Prosecutions for the year ending 30 June 2008.
Stuart Ward
Acting Solicitor
Melbourne
12th September 2008
SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE
A summary of the Office of Public Prosecution’s financial
performance in 2007/08 is set out below. Full financial details for
2007/08 are outlined in the Financial Section of this report.
During the financial year ended 30 June 2008, total revenue was
$46.754 million and total expenses were $46.717 million resulting
in an operating surplus of $37,000. Revenue increased from last
year by $6.62 million (16.5%) to $46.75 million and was closely
matched by an increase in expenses of $6.59 million (16.4%).
Breakdowns of revenue and expenditure are set out below.
Compared to last year, net cash flows from operating activities
increased by $243,000 to $515,000.
Total assets increased by $869,000 to $7.230 million due primarily
to increases in receivables and plant and equipment. Total
liabilities have increased from last year by $684,000 due to an
increase in provisions for employee entitlements.
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
2006
$’000
2005
$’000
2004
$’000
Total revenue
46,754
40,138
34,841
29,948
24,979
Total expenses
46,717
40,128
34,807
31,309
27,659
37
10
34
(1,361)
(2,680)
Net result for year
Net cash flows from operating activities
Total assets
Total liabilities
/FFICEOF0UBLIC0ROSECUTIONS
4OTAL2EVENUE
515
272
323
299
378
7,230
6,361
3,546
3,427
3,710
10,737
10,053
7,349
7,152
6,428
/FFICEOF0UBLIC0ROSECUTIONS
4OTAL%XPENSES
%&13&$*"5*0/"/%".035*4"5*0/
8*5/&44&91&/4&4
0''*$&&91&/4&4
05)&301&3"5*/(&91&/4&4
$03&'6/%*/(
1301&35:3&/5"/%."*/5&/"/$&
5*&%'6/%*/(
130'&44*0/"-4&37*$&4
&.1-0:&3&-"5&%&91&/4&4
OPERATING STATEMENT
Note
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
3(a)
46,754
40,138
46,754
40,138
(27,345)
(22,733)
Income
Government Grants
Total income
Expenses
Employee benefits
3(b)
Depreciation and amortisation
3(c)
(453)
(445)
Supplies and services
3(d)
(18,874)
(16,911)
(45)
(39)
Finance costs
(46,717)
(40,128)
Net result from continuing operations
37
10
Net result for the period
37
10
Total expenses
The accompanying notes form part of these financial statements
65
BALANCE SHEET
As at 30 June 2008
Note
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
Current assets
Cash and cash equivalents
Receivables
17
73
72
5
3,129
2,598
3,202
2,670
Plant and equipment held for sale
46
17
3,248
2,687
5
815
633
6,1(j)
3,167
3,041
Total non-current assets
3,982
3,674
Total assets
7,230
6,361
7
2,967
3,117
8,14
325
367
6,147
5,570
40
25
9,479
9,079
8,14
443
341
9
815
633
1,258
974
Total liabilities
10,737
10,053
Net assets
(3,507)
(3,692)
Total current assets
Non-current assets
Receivables
Property, plant & equipment
Current liabilities
Payables
Provisions
9
Other
Total current liabilities
Non-current liabilities
Provisions
Total non-current liabilities
Equity
Contributed capital
11
2,105
1,957
Reserves
11
240
240
11,1(j)
(5,852)
(5,889)
(3,507)
(3,692)
Accumulated surplus(deficit)
Total equity
Commitments for expenditure
12
Contingent liabilities and contingent assets
13
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN EQUITY
Note
Total equity at beginning of financial year
Effects of change in capitalisation threshold policy
Gain/(loss) on property revaluation
11 (a)
Net income recognised directly in equity
Net result for the period
11 (c)
Total recognised income and expense for the period
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
(3,692)
(3,803)
0
(296)
0
0
0
0
37
10
37
10
Transactions with the State in its capacity as owner
11 (b)
171
406
Equity transfers within Government
11 (b)
(23)
(9)
(3,507)
(3,692)
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
Total equity at end of financial year
CASH FLOW STATEMENT
Note
Cash flows from operating activities
Receipts
Receipts from Government
Total receipts
46,038
37,516
46,038
37,516
(45,626)
(37,602)
Payments
Payments to suppliers and employees
Interest and other costs of finance paid
(45)
(39)
(45,671)
(37,641)
367
(125)
Payments for property, plant and equipment
(373)
(154)
Net cash provided by/(used in) investing activities
(373)
(154)
148
397
(141)
(117)
7
280
Total payments
Net cash provided by/ (used in) operating activities
17 (b)
Cash flows from investing activities
Cash flows from financing activities
Proceeds from capital contributions by State Government
Repayment of finance lease
Net cash provided by/(used in) financing activities
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the financial year
Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the financial year
17 (a)
1
1
72
71
73
72
67
NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE 1. SUMMARY OF ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Statement of compliance
The financial report is a general purpose financial report
which has been prepared on an accrual basis in accordance
with the Financial Management Act 1994, applicable Australian
Accounting Standards (AAS), which includes the Australian
accounting standards issued by the Australian Accounting
Standards Board (AASB), Interpretations and other mandatory
professional requirements.
The financial report also complies with relevant Financial
Reporting Directions (FRDs) issued by the Department of Treasury
and Finance, and relevant Standing Directions (SD) authorised by
the Minister for Finance.
Basis of preparation
The financial report has been prepared on the basis of historical
cost, except for the revaluation of certain non-current assets
and financial instruments. Cost is based on the fair values of the
consideration given in exchange for assets.
In the application of AASs, management is required to make
judgements, estimates and assumptions about carrying values
of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other
sources. The estimates and associated assumptions are based on
historical experience and various other factors that are believed to
be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form
the basis of making judgements. Actual results may differ from
these estimates.
The estimates and underlying assumptions are reviewed on an
ongoing basis. Revisions to accounting estimates are recognised
in the period in which the estimate is revised if the revision affects
only that period or in the period of the revision and future periods
if the revision affects both current and future periods.
Accounting policies are selected and applied in a manner which
ensures that the resulting financial information satisfies the concepts
of relevance and reliability, thereby ensuring that the substance of the
underlying transactions or other events is reported.
The accounting policies set out below have been applied in
preparing the financial statements for the year ended 30 June
2008 and the comparative information presented in the financial
statements for the year ended 30 June 2007.
(a) Reporting entity
The financial report covers the Office of Public Prosecutions
(OPP) as an individual reporting entity. All funds through which
the Office controls resources to carry on its functions have been
included in this financial report. The OPP is the independent
statutory authority responsible for preparing and conducting
criminal prosecutions in Victoria on behalf of the Director of Public
Prosecutions (DPP).
(b) Objectives and funding
The Office’s objectives are to conduct an effective, economical
and efficient prosecution service as an integral part of the
criminal justice system. The service provided by OPP must
meet community expectations of fairness, impartiality and
independence in the application of criminal law.
The Office is predominantly funded by grants from the
Department of Justice.
(c) Goods and services tax
Revenues, expenses and assets are recognised net of the amount
of goods and services tax (GST). The Department of Justice
manages the GST transactions on behalf of OPP, the GST
components of OPP’s receipts and / or payments are recognised in
the Department’s financial statements.
(d) Revenue recognition
Amounts disclosed as revenue are, where applicable, net of
returns, allowances, duties and taxes.
Revenue from the outputs the Office provides to Government
is recognised when those outputs have been delivered and
the relevant Minister has certified delivery of those outputs in
accordance with specified performance criteria.
(e) Resources provided and received free of charge or for
nominal consideration
Contributions of resources and resources provided free of charge
or for nominal consideration are recognised at their fair value.
Contributions in the form of services are only recognised when a
fair value can be reliably determined and the service would have
been purchased if not donated.
(f) Employee benefits expense
Employee benefits expense include all costs related to
employment including wages and salaries, leave entitlements,
redundancy payments and superannuation contributions. These
are recognised when incurred, except for contributions in respect
of defined benefit plans.
Superannuation
Defined Contribution plans
Contributions to defined contribution superannuation plans are
expensed when incurred.
Defined benefit plans
The amount charged to the operating statement in respect of
defined benefit superannuation plan represents the contribution
made by the Office to the superannuation plan in respect to
the current services of current Office staff. Superannuation
contributions are made to the plans based on the relevant rules of
each plan.
The Office does not recognise any defined benefit liability in
respect of the superannuation plan because the Office has no
legal or constructive obligation to pay future benefits relating
to employees; its only obligation is to pay superannuation
contributions as they fall due. The Department of Treasury and
Finance administers and discloses the State’s defined benefit
liabilities in its financial report.
(g) Depreciation
Depreciation is provided on property, plant and equipment,
including freehold buildings but excluding land. Depreciation is
generally calculated on a straight-line basis so as to write off the
net cost or other revalued amount of each asset over its expected
useful life to its estimated residual value. Leasehold improvements
are depreciated over the period of the lease or estimated useful
life, whichever is the shorter, using the straight-line method. The
estimated useful lives, residual values and depreciation method
are reviewed at the end of each annual reporting period.
The following estimated useful lives are used in the calculation of
depreciation:
Plant & Equipment
Leasehold Improvements
2008
2007
5 - 15 Years
5 - 15 Years
10 Years
10 Years
(h) Borrowing costs
Borrowing costs are recognised as expenses in the period in which
they are incurred, and include interest on finance lease charges.
(i) Supplies and services
Supplies and services generally represent day to day running costs,
including maintenance costs, incurred in the normal operations
of the Office. These items are recognised as an expense in the
reporting period in which they are incurred.
(j) Non-current assets
All non-current assets controlled by the Office are reported in the
balance sheet.
Change in accounting policy:
The OPP has adopted a capitalisation policy for fixed assets for
capital purchase in excess of $5,000 (2007, $1,000). The change
has been applied retrospectively and comparative information
in relation to 2007 financial year has been restated accordingly.
Due to the immaterial impact on the Operating Statement, no
retrospective changes have been applied to the affected Operating
Statement line items but the total balance has been adjusted to
accumulated surplus.
The following table shows how the change in asset capitalisation
threshold impacted comparative balances:
30-Jun-07
Increase /
(Decrease)
2007
Restated
Balance Sheet (extract)
$’000
$’000
$’000
Property, plant and
equipment
3,337
(296)
3,041
Total assets
6,657
(296)
6,361
Accumulated surplus
/(deficit)
(5,593)
(296)
(5,889)
Total equity
(3,396)
(296)
(3,692)
(k) Cash and cash equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents comprise cash on hand and cash at bank.
(l) Receivables
All debtors are recognised at the amounts receivable as they are due
for settlement at no more than 30 days from the date of recognition.
Collectability of debtors is reviewed on an ongoing basis. A
provision for doubtful debts is raised when some doubt as to
collection exists. Debts which are known to be uncollectible are
written off.
legal or constructive restrictions imposed on the land, public
announcements or commitments made in relation to the intended
use of the land. Theoretical opportunities that may be available in
relation to the asset are not taken into account until it is virtually
certain that the restrictions will no longer apply.
During the reporting period, the Office may hold cultural assets,
heritage assets, Crown land and infrastructures.
Such assets are deemed worthy of preservation because of the
social rather than financial benefits they provide the community.
The nature of these assets means that there are certain limitations
and restrictions imposed on their use and/or disposal.
(n) Revaluations of non-current assets
Non-current physical assets measured at fair value are revalued
in accordance with FRD 103C based on the asset’s Government
purpose classification.
Revaluation increments are credited directly to equity in the
revaluation reserve, except that, to the extent that an increment
reverses a revaluation decrement in respect of that class of
asset previously recognised as an expense in the net result, the
increment is recognised as income in determining the net result.
Revaluation decrements are recognised immediately as expenses
in the net result, except that, to the extent that a credit balance
exists in the revaluation reserve in respect of the same class of
assets, they are debited to the revaluation reserve.
Revaluation increases and revaluation decreases relating to
individual assets within a class of property, plant and equipment
are offset against one another within that class but are not offset in
respect of assets in different classes.
Revaluation reserves are not normally transferred to accumulated
surplus on de-recognition of the relevant assets
(o) Non-current assets classified as held for sale
Non-current assets classified as held for sale are measured at the
lower of carrying amount and fair value less costs to sell, and are
not subject to depreciation.
Non-current assets and disposal groups are classified as held
for sale if their carrying amount will be recovered through a sale
transaction rather than through continuing use. This condition
is regarded as met only when the sale is highly probable and the
asset’s sale is expected to be completed within one year from the
date of classification.
(p) Interest bearing liabilities
Interest bearing liabilities are recorded initially at fair value, net of
transaction costs.
Subsequent to initial recognition, interest bearing liabilities are
measured at amortised cost with any difference between the initial
recognised amount and the redemption value being recognised in
profit and loss over the period of the interest bearing liability using
the effective interest rate method.
(m) Non-current physical assets
Land and buildings are measured at fair value. Plant, equipment
and vehicles are measured at cost less accumulated depreciation
and impairment.
(q) Contributions by owners
Additions to net assets that have been designated as contributions
by owners are recognised as contributed capital. Other transfers
that are in the nature of contributions or distributions have also
been designated as contributions by owners.
Crown land is measured at fair value with regard to the property’s
highest and best use after due consideration is made for any
(r) Leased assets
Leases are classified as finance leases whenever the terms of the
69
lease transfer substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership
to the lessee. All other leases are classified as operating leases.
Assets held under finance leases are recognised as assets of the
Office at their fair value or, if lower, at the present value of the
minimum lease payments, each determined at the inception of the
lease. The corresponding liability to the lessor is included in the
balance sheet as a finance lease obligation.
Lease payments are apportioned between finance charges and
reduction of the lease obligation so as to achieve a constant rate of
interest on the remaining balance of the liability. Finance charges
are charged directly against income.
Finance lease assets are amortised on a straight-line basis over the
estimated useful life of the asset.
Operating lease payments are recognised as an expense on a
straight-line basis over the lease term, except where another
systematic basis is more representative of the time pattern in
which economic benefits from the leased asset are consumed.
Employee benefits on-costs
Employee benefits on-costs (payroll tax, workers compensation,
superannuation, annual leave and LSL accrued while on LSL
taken in service) are recognised separately from provision for
employee benefits.
(u) Commitments
Commitments include those operating, capital and other
outsourcing commitments arising from non-cancellable
contractual or statutory sources and are disclosed at their nominal
value.
(v) Contingent assets and contingent liabilities
Contingent assets and contingent liabilities are not recognised
in the balance sheet , but are disclosed by way of a note and, if
quantifiable, are measured at nominal value.
(w) Rounding of amounts
Amounts in the financial report have been rounded to the nearest
thousand dollars, or in other cases, to the nearest dollar.
(s) Payables
Payables are recognised when the Office becomes obliged to make
payments resulting from purchase of goods and services.
(x) Comparative information
Where necessary the figures of the previous year have been
reclassified to facilitate comparison.
(t) Provisions
(y) New accounting standards and interpretations
Employee benefits
(i) Wages and salaries, annual leave and sick leave
Liabilities for wages and salaries, including non-monetary
benefits, annual leave and accumulating sick leave expected
to be settled within 12 months of the reporting date are
recognised in the provision for employee benefits in respect of
employee services up to the reporting date, classified as current
liabilities and measured at their nominal values.
Those liabilities that are not expected to be settled within 12
months are recognised in the provision for employee benefits
as current liabilities, measured at present value of the amounts
expected to be paid when the liabilities are settled using the
remuneration rate expected to apply at the time of settlement.
(ii) Long service leave
Liability for long service leave (LSL) is recognised in the
provision for employee benefits.
Current liability - unconditional LSL (representing 7 or more
years of continuous service for all staff) is disclosed as a current
liability even where the Office does not expect to settle the liability
within 12 months because it will not have the unconditional right
to defer the settlement of the entitlement should an employee
take leave within 12 months:
The components of this current LSL liability are measured at :
- present value - component that the Office does not expect to
settle within 12 months
- nominal value - component that the Office expects to settle
within 12 months
Non-current liability - conditional LSL (representing less
than 7 years of continuous service for all staff) is disclosed as a
non-current liability. There is an unconditional right to defer the
settlement of the entitlement until the employee has completed
the requisite years of service.
This non-current LSL liability is measured at present value.
Standard /
Interpretation
Summary
Applicable for
annual reporting
periods
beginning or
ending on
Impact on
OPP financial
statements
AASB 2007-3
Amendments
to Australian
Accounting
Standards arising
from AASB8
[AASB5, AASB6,
AASB102, AASB107,
AASB119, AASB127,
AASB134, AASB136,
AASB1023 and
AASB1038)
An accompanying
amending
standard, also
introduced
consequential
amendments into
other standards
Beginning 1 Jan
2009
Impact expected
to be insignificant
AASB 2007-8
Editorial
amendments
to Australian
Accounting
Standards to
align with IFRS
terminology
Beginning 1 Jan
2009
Impact expected
to be insignificant
Amendments
to Australian
Accounting
Standards arising
from AASB101
(z) Prospective accounting changes
GAAP-GFS Convergence
The AASB has recently approved AASB 1049 Whole of
Government and General Government Sector Financial
Reporting, which will apply to future financial reports of the
Victorian general government sector. In October 2007, the AASB
extended AASB 1049 to also apply to financial reports of the
Whole of Government economic entity. The standard, which will
be applicable for annual reporting periods beginning on or after
1 July 2008, converges Australian Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles (GAAP) and Government Finance Statistics (GFS)
reporting. It also includes additional disclosure requirements. The
effect of any changes to recognition or measurement requirements
as a result of this new standard is being evaluated.
NOTE 2. OUTPUT OF THE OFFICE
Description of output group:
The number of briefs prepared for hearings and the attendance at hearings on behalf of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Outcome expected:
An effective, economical and efficient prosecution service which is an integral part of the criminal justice system.
As there is only one output group within the Office, related revenue and expenditure is outlined in the Operating Statement.
NOTE 3. NET RESULT FROM OPERATIONS
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
46,754
40,138
46,754
40,138
Salary and wages
20,484
16,829
Superannuation
1,893
1,487
Annual leave and long services leave expense
3,181
2,594
Other on-costs (fringe benefits tax, payroll tax and workcover levy)
1,787
1,823
27,345
22,733
Depreciation of non-current assets
89
148
Amortisation of non-current assets
364
297
453
445
13,295
11,863
2,330
2,069
Information technology
531
354
Printing, stationery & library expenses
769
717
Postage, communication & office expenses
716
717
Interpreters
298
290
Other operating expenses
919
886
16
15
18,874
16,911
45
39
46,717
40,128
Income
(a) Income from Government
Grants for continuing operations
Expenses
(b) Employee benefit expense
(c) Depreciation and amortisation expense
(d) Supplies and Services
Professional services and witness payments
Rent and property
Audit Services
(e) Finance costs
Total expense
71
NOTE 4. REMUNERATION OF AUDITORS
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
16
15
16
15
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
44
39
(37)
(29)
Amounts owing from Department of Justice
3,122
2,588
Aggregate carrying amount of receivables
3,129
2,598
Amounts owing from Department of Justice
815
633
Aggregate carrying amount of receivables
815
633
Victorian Auditor General’s Office
Audit of the financial report
NOTE 5. RECEIVABLES
Current
Debtors
Allowance for doubtful debts
Non-current
NOTE 6. PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT
Classification by Purpose Groups - Carrying amounts
Public Safety and Environment
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
740
740
740
740
2,277
2,249
(1,045)
(833)
1,232
1,416
1,972
2,156
820
408
(301)
(225)
519
183
Nature-based Classification :
Land at fair value *
Leasehold improvements at cost
Less: Accumulated amortisation
Total land and leasehold improvements
Plant, equipment at cost
Less: Accumulated depreciation
864
866
(202)
(178)
662
688
1,181
871
3,153
3,027
Cultural assets at fair value
14
14
Total cultural assets
14
14
3,167
3,041
Plant and equipment under finance lease (at cost)
Less: Accumulated amortisation
Total plant and equipment
Net carrying amount of property, plant and equipment
73
NOTE 6. PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT (CONTINUED)
Plant,
equipment
Lease hold
Plant,
under
Land at fair improvements equipment at Finance lease
value*
at cost
cost
at cost
Cultural
Assets
at fair value
Total
2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007
$’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000
740
740
1416
1130
183
354
688
583
Additions
Opening balance
-
-
28
465
551
269
341
441
Disposal
-
-
-
-
(126)
(8)
(169)
14
27 3,041
2834
-
1
920
1176
(201)
-
(2)
(295)
(211)
Transfer to assets classified as held for sale
-
-
-
-
-
-
(46)
(17)
-
-
(46)
(17)
Depreciation expense
-
-
(212)
(178)
(89)
(148)
(152)
(118)
-
-
(453)
(444)
Effects of change in accounting policy
-
-
-
-
-
(284)
-
-
-
(12)
740 1,232 1,416
519
183
662
688
14
Closing balance
740
14 3,167
(296)
3041
*An independent valuation of OPP’s land was carried out in June 2006, to determine the fair value of land.The valuation which
conforms to Australian Valuations Standards, was determined by reference to the amounts for which assets could be exchanged
between knowledgeable willing parties in an arm’s length transaction. The valuation was based on independent assessments. In the
current year OPP has reviewed the fair value of the assets and it has been determined that no material changes have occurred since the
last revaluation.
Figures for 2007 have been restated due to change in the capitalisation threshold policy from $1,000 to $5,000 (refer to note 1).
NOTE 7. PAYABLES AND ACCRUALS
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
646
560
Account Payables and Accruals
2,321
2,557
Total
2,967
3,117
Accrued Employee Benefits
The Payables and Accruals amounts are exclusive of GST. The Department of Justice pays GST on behalf of the Office. The average
credit period is 30 days. No interest is charged from the date of the invoice.
(a) Maturity analysis of payables
Please refer to note 18 for the ageing analysis of payables
(b) Nature and extent of risk arising from payables
Please refer to note 18 for the extent of credit risk arising from payables
NOTE 8. INTEREST BEARING LIABILITIES
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
325
367
325
367
443
341
443
341
Current
325
367
Non-current
443
341
768
708
Plant and equipment under finance lease (note 6)
662
688
Total non-current assets pledged as security
662
688
Current
Secured
Finance lease liabilities (note 14)
Non-current
Secured
Finance lease liabilities (note 14)
Aggregate carrying amount of interest bearing liabilities
Lease liabilities are effectively secured as the rights to the leased
assets revert to the lessor in the event of default.
Assets pledged as security
The carrying amounts of non-current assets pledged as security are:
Finance lease
(a) Maturity analysis of interest bearing liabilities
Please refer to note 18 for the ageing analysis of interest bearing liabilities.
(b) Nature and extent of risk arising from interest bearing liabilities
Please refer to note 18 for the nature and extent of risks arising from interest bearing liabilities.
75
NOTE 9. PROVISIONS
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
- Unconditional and expected to be settled within 12 months (ii)
4,106
3,272
- Unconditional and expected to be settled after 12 months (iii)
1,064
1,409
5,170
4,681
- Unconditional and expected to be settled within 12 months (ii)
807
720
- Unconditional and expected to be settled after 12 months (iii)
170
169
977
889
6,147
5,570
Employee benefits (note 9(a))
705
548
Provisions related to employee benefits on-costs
110
85
Total non current provisions
815
633
Annual leave entitlement
1,903
1,807
Unconditional long service leave entitlements
3,267
2,874
5,170
4,681
705
548
5,875
5,229
Current on-costs
977
889
Non-current on-costs
110
85
Total on-costs
1,087
974
Total employee benefits and related on-costs
6,962
6,203
Current
Employee benefits (i) (note 9(a))
Provisions related to employee benefit on-costs
Total current provisions
Non current
(a) Employee benefits (i) and related on-costs
Current employee benefits:
Non current employee benefits:
Conditional long service leave entitlements
Total employee benefits
(b) Movement in provisions for on-costs
Opening balance
Additional provisions recognized
Reductions arising from payments/other sacrifices of future economic benefits
Closing balance
974
8,368
(8,255)
1,087
Current
977
Non-current
110
1,087
(i)
Provisions for employee benefits consist of amounts for annual leave and long service leave accrued by employees, not including on-costs.
The amounts disclosed are nominal amounts.
(iii)
The amounts disclosed are discounted to present value.
(ii)
NOTE 10. SUPERANNUATION
Government Employees’ Superannuation Fund
No liability is recognised in the balance sheet for the Office’s share of the State’s unfunded superannuation liability. The State’s
unfunded superannuation liability has been reflected in the financial statements of the Department of Treasury and Finance
However, superannuation contributions for the reporting period are included as part of salaries and associated costs in the operating
statement of the Office.
The name and details of the major employee superannuation funds and contributions made by the Office are as follows:
Fund
Contribution
for the Year
2008
$
Contribution
for the Year
2007
$
Contribution
Outstanding
at Year End
2008
$
Contribution
outstanding
at Year End
2007
$
596,564
582,269
0
0
993,119
852,338
0
0
302,914
52,573
0
0
1,892,597
1,487,180
0
0
Defined benefit plans:
State Superannuation Fund Revised and New Schemes
Defined contribution plans:
Vic. Super Scheme
Other private funds
Total contributions to all funds
The bases for contributions are determined by the various schemes.
The requirements of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 are fully complied with.
All employees of the Office are entitled to benefits on retirement, disability or death from the Government
Employees’ Superannuation Fund. This Fund provides defined lump sum benefits based on years of service and final average salary.
The above amounts were measured as at 30 June of each year, or in the case of employer contributions
they relate to the years ended 30 June.
77
NOTE 11. EQUITY AND MOVEMENTS IN EQUITY
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
240
240
240
240
Balance at the beginning of the year
240
240
Revaluation increment/(decrements)
0
0
240
240
2,105
1,957
1,957
1,560
Equity transfers from related entities
148
397
2,105
1,957
(5,889)
(5,603)
0
(296)
37
10
Accumulated (deficit) at the end of the financial year
(5,852)
(5,889)
Total equity at the end of the financial year
(3,507)
(3,692)
(a) Reserves
Asset revaluation reserve
Movements
Asset revaluation reserve
Balance at the end of the year
(b) Contributed Capital
Contributed capital
Movements
Balance at the end of the year
(c) Accumulated deficit
Effects of change in the capitalisation threshold policy
Net result for the reporting period
NOTE 12. COMMITMENTS FOR EXPENDITURE
Capital commitments
There are no outstanding capital commitments
as at 30 June 2008 (2007 - nil).
NOTE 13. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND CONTINGENT ASSETS
There are no contingent liabilities or contingent assets at balance date
not provided for in the Balance Sheet at 30 June 2008 (2007- nil).
NOTE 14. LEASES
Disclosures for lessees - finance leases
Leasing arrangements
Finance leases relate to motor vehicles with lease terms of 3 years. The Office has options to purchase the equipment for a nominal
amount at the conclusion of the lease agreements.
Minimum future lease payments
Present value of minimum
future lease payments
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
Not longer than 1 year
363
399
325
367
Longer than one year and not longer than 5 years
471
363
443
341
0
0
0
0
Finance leases
Commitments in relation to finance leases are payable as
follows:
Longer than 5 years
Minimum lease payments
834
762
768
708
Less: Future finance charges
(66)
(54)
0
0
Present value of minimum lease payments
768
708
768
708
Current interest bearing liabilities (Note 8)
325
367
Non-current interest bearing liabilities (Note 8)
443
341
768
708
Included in the financial statements as:
The weighted average interest rate implicit in the leases is 7.05% (2007 - 6.69%).
Disclosures for lessees - operating leases
Leasing arrangements
Operating leases relate to equipment and accommodation with lease terms of between 3 to 5 years, with an option to extend for a
further 5 years. All operating lease contracts contain market review clauses in the event that the Office exercises its option to renew.
The Office does not have an option to purchase the leased asset at the expiry of the lease period.
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
Not longer than 1 year
2,725
1,924
Longer than one year and not longer than 5 years
3,310
4,368
Operating leases
Commitments for minimum lease payments in relation to
cancellable and non cancellable operating leases are payable
as follows:
Longer than 5 years
0
0
6,035
6,292
Representing:
Cancellable operating leases
Non-cancellable operating leases
20
56
6,015
6,236
6,035
6,292
79
NOTE 15. RESPONSIBLE PERSONS
In accordance with the Directions of the Minister for Finance under the Financial Management Act 1994, the following disclosures are
made regarding responsible person for the reporting period.
Names
The persons who held the positions of Ministers and Accountable Officer in the Department and the Office are as follows:
Attorney-General
The Hon. Rob Hulls, MP
1 July 2007 to 30 June 2008
Acting Attorney-General
The Hon. John Lenders, MLC
1 July 2007 to 8 July 2007
Secretary to the Department of Justice
Acting Secretary to the Department of Justice
The Hon. Bob Cameron, MP
16 January 2008 to 28 January 2008
21 February 2008 to 26 February 2008
29 March 2008 to 6 April 2008
Ms Penny Armytage
1 July 2007 to 30 June 2008
Mr Ross Kennedy
20 July 2007 to 27 July 2007
Dr Claire Noone
6 October 2007 to 25 October 2007
Mr Ross Kennedy
21 December 2007 to 4 January 2008
Dr Roslyn Kelleher
25 April 2008 to 9 June 2008
Accountable Officer
Ms Angela Cannon
1 July 2007 to 30 May 2008
Acting Accountable Officer
Mr Stuart Ward
2 June 2008 to 30 June 2008
Remuneration
Remuneration received or receivable by the Accountable Officer in connection with the management of the Office during the reporting
period was in the range:
$180,000 - $190,000 ($180,000 - $190,000 in 2007)
Ministerial remuneration is disclosed in the annual report of the Department of Premier and Cabinet. Remuneration received or
receivable by the Secretary in connection with the management of the Department during the reporting period is disclosed in the
annual report of the Department of Justice.
Other transactions
Other related transactions and loans requiring disclosure under the Directions of the Minister of Finance have been considered and
there are no matters to report.
NOTE 16. REMUNERATION OF EXECUTIVES
The number of executive officers, other than the Accountable Officer, and their total remuneration during the reporting period are shown in the
first two columns in the table below in their relevant income bands. The base remuneration of executive officers is shown in the third and fourth
columns. Base remuneration is exclusive of bonus payments, long-service leave payments, redundancy payments and retirement benefits.
A number of executive officers retired, resigned or were retrenched in 2007. This has had a significant impact on total remuneration
figures due to the inclusion of annual leave, long service leave and retrenchment payments in 2007.
Income Band
Total Remuneration
Base Remuneration
2008
2007
2008
2007
$100,000 - $109,999
1
0
1
0
$110,000 - $119,999
0
0
0
0
$120,000 - $129,999
1
0
1
0
$130,000 - $139,999
0
0
0
1
$140,000 - $149,999
0
0
0
0
$150,000 - $159,999
0
0
0
0
$160,000 - $169,999
0
0
0
0
$340,000 - $349,999
0
1
0
0
$470,000 - $479,999
0
1
0
0
Total Numbers
2
2
2
1
$231,752
$822,829
$231,752
$131,060
Total Amount
NOTE 17. NOTES TO CASH FLOW STATEMENT
Note
2008
$’000
2007
$’000
73
72
37
10
453
445
126
10
5
3
31
Decrease (increase) in amounts due from related entities
5
(716)
(2,622)
Increase (decrease) in payables
7
(396)
1,454
845
545
15
2
367
(125)
(a) Reconciliation of cash
For the purposes of the Cash Flow Statement, cash includes cash on hand and in banks and
investments in money market instruments, net of outstanding bank overdrafts, Cash at the
end of the financial year as shown in the Cash Flow Statement is reconciled to the related
items in the balance sheet as follows:
Cash
(b) Reconciliation of net result for the period to net cash flows from operating activities
Net Results for the period
Depreciation and amortisation
3(c)
Net loss on sale of non-current assets
Change in operating assets and liabilities
Decrease (increase) in receivables
Increase (decrease) in provisions (LSL and AL)
Increase (decrease) in other liabilities
Net cash inflow from operating activities
81
NOTE 18. FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
(a) Significant accounting policies
Details of the significant accounting policies and methods adopted, including the criteria for recognition, the basis of measurement,
and the basis on which income and expenses are recognised, with respect to each class of financial asset, financial liability and equity
instruments are disclosed in Note 1 to the financial statements.
Categorisation of financial instruments
Note
Category
Carrying amount 2008
$’000
Carrying amount 2007
$’000
17
N/A
73
72
Receivables
5
Loans and receivables (at amortised cost)
7
10
Amount due from
Department of Justice
5
Loans and receivables (at amortised cost)
3,937
3,221
7
Financial liabilities measured at amortised
cost
2,967
3,117
8,14
Financial liabilities measured at amortised
cost
768
708
Financial Assets
Cash and cash equivalent
Financial Liabilities
Payables
(b) Credit risk exposure
Credit risk arises from the financial assets of OPP, which comprise cash and cash equivalents, trade and other receivables. OPP’s
exposure to credit risk arises from the potential default of counter party on their contractual obligations resulting in financial loss to
OPP. Credit risk is measured at fair value and is monitored on a regular basis. Credit risk associated with OPP’s financial assets is
minimal because the main debtor is the Victorian Government. Provisions of impairment for financial assets is calculated based on past
experience, and current and expected changes in client credit ratings. The Office’s maximum exposure to credit risk at balance date in
relation to each class of recognised financial asset is the carrying amount of these assets as indicated in the Balance Sheet.
(c) Liquidity risk
Liquidity risk arises when OPP is unable to meet its financial obligations as they fall due. OPP operates under the Government fair
payments policy of settling financial obligations within 30 days and in the event of a dispute, make payments within 30 days from the
date of resolution. OPP’s exposure to liquidity risk is deemed insignificant based on prior periods’ data and current assessment of risk.
Maximum exposure to liquidity risk is the carrying amounts of financial liabilities in the Balance Sheet.
(d) Interest Rate risk exposure and ageing analysis of financial assets
($ thousand)
Description
Note
Weighted
average
effective
interest rate
Carrying
amount
Interest rate exposure
%
2008
Not
past due
and not
impaired
Fixed interest
rate
Variable
interest rate
Non- interest
bearing
Financial Assets
Receivables
5
-
7
-
-
7
7
Amount due from
5
-
3,937
-
-
3,937
3,937
-
3,944
-
-
3,944
3,944
Total
2007
Financial Assets
Receivables
5
-
10
-
-
10
10
Amount due from
5
-
3,221
-
-
3,221
3221
3,231
-
-
3,231
3,231
Total
83
Interest Rate risk exposure and maturity of financial liabilities
($ thousand)
Description
Weighted
average
effective
interest Carrying
Note
rate
amount
%
2008
Nominal
amount
Interest rate exposure
Fixed
interest
rate
Variable
interest
rate
Noninterest
bearing
-
-
2,967
Maturity dates
Less
than 1
month
1-3
3
months months
- 1 year
1-5
years
Payables
7
-
8,14
7.05%
2,967
2,967
2,967
-
-
-
Interest bearing
liabilities
Finance lease liability
Total
768
768
-
-
834
156
70
193
415
3,735
768
-
2,967
3,801
3,123
70
193
415
3,117
-
-
3,117
3,117
3,117
-
-
-
708
708
-
-
762
146
43
229
344
3,825
708
-
3,117
3,879
3,263
43
229
344
2007
Payables
7
-
8,14
6.69%
Interest bearing
liabilities
Finance lease liability
Total
(e) Market risk
The Office’s exposure to market risk is primarily through interest rate risk. The exposure to interest rate risk is insignificant and arises
primarily through the Office’s interest bearing liabilities.
(f) Fair value
The carrying amount of financial assets and financial liabilities of the Office approximates their fair value because of the short term
nature of the financial instruments and the expectation that they will be paid in full.
ACCOUNTABLE OFFICER’S AND CHIEF FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING OFFICER’S DECLARATION
We certify that the attached financial report for the Office of Public Prosecutions has been prepared in accordance with Standing Direction
4.2 of the Financial Management Act 1994, applicable Financial Reporting Directions, Australian accounting standards and other mandatory
professional reporting requirements.
We further state that, in our opinion, the information set out in the Operating Statement, Balance Sheet, Statement of Changes in Equity,
Cash Flow Statement and notes forming part of the financial report, presents fairly the financial transactions during the year ended 30 June
2008 and financial position of the Office as at 30 June 2008.
We are not aware of any circumstance, which would render any particulars included in the financial report to be misleading or inaccurate.
We authorise the attached financial report for issue on 12th September, 2008.
Eddie Chew
Stuart Ward
Acting Chief Finance and Accounting Officer
Acting Solicitor
Melbourne
12th September 2008
Melbourne
12th September 2008
85
87
ATTESTATION ON COMPLIANCE WITH THE AUSTRALIAN/NEW ZEALAND RISK MANAGEMENT STANDARD
I, Eddie Chew certify that the Office of Public Prosecutions has risk management processes in place consistent with the
Australian/New Zealand Risk Management Standard (or equivalent designated standard) and an internal control system is in
place that enables the executive to understand, manage and satisfactorily control risk exposures. The audit committee verifies this
assurance and that the risk profile of the Office of Public Prosecutions has been critically reviewed within the last 12 months.
Eddie Chew
Acting Chief Finance and Accounting Officer
Melbourne
12th September 2008
APPENDICES CONTENTS
Appendix 1
Output and performance measures
90
Appendix 2
Other legal functions of the DPP
90
Appendix 3
Crown appeals under section 567A of the Crimes Act 1958
91
Appendix 4
OPP performance in 2007/08
92
Appendix 5
Crown Prosecutor performance in 2007/08
93
Appendix 6
Assistance provided to victims and witnesses in 2007/08
95
Appendix 7
Freedom of Information
96
Appendix 8
Whistleblowers Protection Act 2001
97
Appendix 9
The OPP workforce
98
Appendix 10
99
Appendix 11
Environmental reporting
100
Appendix 12
Supplementary information
103
Appendix 13
Statement of availability of other information
104
Appendix 14
Disclosure index
105
Glossary and Abreviations
106
89
APPENDICES TO THE OPP ANNUAL REPORT 2007-08
APPENDIX 1. OUTPUT AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES1
Target
Actual
Variance
from target
Variance
from 06/07
5600
8600
53.6%
16.4%
Quantity
Judge sitting days2
Number of appeals lodged in the Court of Appeal and the High Court
Number of filing hearings - Magistrates’ Court
380
506
33.2%
-24.6%
3200
2986
-6.7%
-12.0%
95%
94%
-1.1%
4.4%
<40
5
-
-
<5
0
-
-
Quantity
Customer satisfaction
Timeliness
Number of adjournments sought by the Crown in County Court and
Magistrates’ Court on the grounds of insufficient time to prepare3
Percentage of procedures not meeting statutory time limits
Notes
1 These measures are reported by the OPP to the Department of Justice as part of the Budget Paper 3 output and performance measures
reporting process.
2 This measure provides an indicator of OPP workload demands. OPP staff need to be prepared and attendant in court to facilitate a judge sitting
day. The total number of judge sitting days has continued its upward trend.
3 Data provided for this measure does not include adjournments in the Magistrates’ Court as this data is not collected by the OPP.
APPENDIX 2. OTHER LEGAL FUNCTIONS OF THE DPP
As well as formal prosecuting activities and appeals, the Director
of Public Prosecutions undertakes a number of other legal
functions. These are set out below.
stayed a Presentment made by or on behalf of the Director. The
Director was not successful and has commenced an Appeal to the
Court of Appeal against that decision.
Order 56 Judicial Reviews
Order 56 of the Supreme Court Rules provides a procedure to
review the orders or actions of a judicial officer, usually on the
basis of an error as to jurisdiction, a failure to exercise jurisdiction
or a denial of procedural fairness. The DPP uses the Order 56
procedure to review decisions in the Magistrates’ Court and the
County Court where the decision infringes jurisdiction and is not
amenable to other forms of appeal.
Section 582 leave applications
Applications can be made to the Court of Appeal under s582 of
the Crimes Act 1958 for leave to appeal against a conviction or
sentence. These applications are heard by a single judge. Where
an application is refused by a single judge, the applicant can
elect to have the matter heard by the full Court of Appeal. The
DPP represents the Crown in these matters. In 2007/08, 148
applications were heard by single judges in the Court of Appeal:
110 were granted and 38 refused.
The Order 56 procedure is also used by unsuccessful appellants to
review a County Court appeal pursuant to s83 of the Magistrates’
Court Act 1989, as this is the only avenue available for further
appeal in such proceedings. A high proportion of these reviews
relate to drink driving prosecutions.
In 2007/08, the Director acted for respondent police informants
in 12 Order 56 Judicial Reviews of County Court appeals. Eight of
these appeals commenced within the 2007/08 financial year and
all were commenced by defendants. Three were commenced by
the DPP. Within the 2007/08 financial year, nine of these matters
proceeded to final hearing and judgment. Two further matters
proceeded to final hearing within the 2007/08 financial year and
are awaiting judgment.
Three Court of Appeal Applications relating to Order 56 Judicial
Reviews were commenced and two were determined in the
2007/2008 financial year.
The DPP reviewed one County Court judge’s decision by way of
Order 56 Judicial Review. In that case the Trial Judge permanently
Entry of nolle prosequi
During the year, applications for the entry of nolle prosequi
submitted by the legal representatives of accused persons or
forwarded by Crown Prosecutors were granted on 121 occasions.
Indemnities from prosecution, undertakings or letters of comfort
Director’s undertakings, indemnities or letter of comfort were
issued to a total of 52 witnesses who gave evidence against 69
accused in 52 separate matters.
Consents to prosecute
The DPP consented to file presentments in relation to 15 matters
pursuant to s321 of the Crimes Act 1958.
The DPP granted 38 consents or authorities to prosecute in cases
involving offences pursuant to ss47A, 50 or 69 of the Crimes Act 1958.
No consents to prosecute were granted under the Legal Profession
Practice Act 1958 or the Judicial Proceedings Reports Act 1958.
One consent to prosecute was granted pursuant to s90 of the
Estate Agents Act 1980.
Two consents to prosecute were granted pursuant to s26(5) of the
Magistrates’ Court Act 1989.
Three consents to prosecute were granted pursuant to s132 of the
Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004.
Direct presentments
The DPP directly presented an accused person on 44 occasions.
Interstate extraditions and transfers
Interstate extraditions were undertaken for the return to Victoria of
three persons charged with various offences.
International extraditions
The DPP formally requested the Commonwealth AttorneyGeneral to institute the international extradition of Mr H from the
United Kingdom and another accused person (whose details are
currently suppressed) from the Netherlands. The OPP continued
to work with the Commonwealth Government to extradite Mr M
from Greece.
Assistance provided to the Coroner
In 2007/08, the OPP assisted the Coroner in seven hearings.
Contempt of court
The Director commenced 1 prosecutions for contempt of court
in 2007/08.
Conflict of interest
There were no matters referred to the Attorney-General pursuant
to s29(1) of the Public Prosecutions Act 1994 as the result of a
possible conflict of interest.
Confiscation Act 1997 proceedings
During 2007/08, the Director obtained 90 new Restraining Orders
and dealt with 248 subsequent applications. Of the Restraining
Orders obtained, 66 contained Automatic Forfeiture as a purpose, 25
contained Compensation to victims as a purpose and 69 contained
Pecuniary Penalty orders as a purpose. 5 Restraining Orders were
for Civil Forfeiture. There were a total of 940 separate court hearings
arising from Confiscation Act matters during the year.
The range of offences related to these orders included murder, drug
trafficking, armed robbery, money laundering, rape, incest and theft.
APPENDIX 3. CROWN APPEALS UNDER SECTION 567A OF THE CRIMES ACT 1958
In 2007/08, 27 appeals against sentence instituted by the DPP to the Court of Appeal pursuant to s567A of the Crimes Act 1958 were
completed. Three of these appeals were abandoned. Of the 24 appeals where judgment was delivered by the court, eight were allowed
and 16 were dismissed.
No
MATTER NAME
DATE OF
STATUS OF
JUDGMENT APPEAL
No
MATTER NAME
DATE OF
STATUS OF
JUDGMENT APPEAL
1
TT
2.8.07
Abandoned
15
RONGONUI Robert
7.12.07
Allowed
2
MIRIK Metin
6.8.07
Dismissed
16
RALPH Brendan
14.12.07
Dismissed
3
MIRIK Cetin
6.8.07
Allowed
17
MOURKAKOS Peter
19.12.07
Allowed
4
DOWNING Jason
7.8.07
Dismissed
18
HINTON Andrew
28.2.08
Dismissed
5
BRIDLE Steven
27.8.07
Dismissed
19
PETERSON Paul
28.2.08
Dismissed
6
BW
31.8.07
Dismissed
20
HAMMENT Raymond 28.2.08
Dismissed
7
SAMU Pio
6.9.07
Dismissed
21
GREEN Anthony
Dismissed
8
COLEMAN Scott
24.9.07
Abandoned
22
KOSMIDIS Theodoris
24.4.08
Allowed
9
JOYCE Clinton
2.10.07
Allowed
23
DANIEL David
16.5.08
Dismissed
10
GREEN Kyle
23.10.07
Dismissed
24
ROUT Ben
29.5.08
Dismissed
11
PAU Ion
29.10.07
Allowed
25
TOUMNGEUN Kia
29.5.08
Dismissed
12
TURNBULL Michael
13.11.07
Dismissed
26
LOVETT Richard
12.6.08
Abandoned
13
SMEATON Shem
15.11.07
Allowed
27
McMASTER Stuart
12.6.08
Dismissed
14
TOMA Martin
6.12.07
Allowed
6.3.08
91
APPENDIX 4. OPP PERFORMANCE IN 2007/08
Briefs prepared and hearings attended
Briefs prepared and
hearings attended
Average number per staff*
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
49,020
50,097
52,800
56,525
64,767
66,413
67,570
69,183
72,633
248.8
249.2
258.7
271.8
305.5
281.0
301.7
312.2
256.5
* Note that this refers to all legal, legal support and corporate services staff (FTE) on payroll as at 30 June 2008 (excluding Governor in Council appointees)
Trials conducted
Melbourne County Court
Melbourne Supreme Court
267
239
216
212
340
355
341
302
340
39
39
30
49
49
32
43
42
41
Circuit County and
Supreme Courts
136
117
108
100
135
124
118
101
118
Total Trials
442
395
354
361
524
511
502
445
499
1021
1022
916
965
1089
1005
828
966
866
Plea of guilty hearings conducted
Melbourne County Court
Melbourne Supreme Court
Circuit County and
Supreme Courts
Total plea of guilty hearings
56
49
37
25
43
48
63
62
29
238
229
226
256
212
197
218
216
255
1315
1300
1179
1246
1344
1250
1109
1244
1150
Judge sitting days
Supreme Court
County Court
Circuit County and
Supreme Courts
Total*
679
652
558
752
817
809
1158
1123
1008
3723
3568
3486
3777
4640
4558
4733
4929
5894
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1336
1698
4402
4220
4044
4529
5457
5367
5891
7388
8600
68.0
68.1
60.5
57.0
55.9
64.1
58.8
* Note that the total prior to 2006/07 does not include Circuit
Case outcomes as a percentage of total case completions
Guilty Pleas Pre-Trial
Guilty Pleas Listed as Trial
63.6
66.4
6.7
5.8
5.3
5.7
9.8
10.0
9.3
9.4
11.0
Guilty Pleas (Total) as a % of
Case Completions
70.3
72.2
73.3
73.8
70.3
67.0
65.2
73.5
69.8
Convictions (Trial)
14.0
14.4
14.0
12.9
16.1
15.0
17.1
14.6
16.5
9.6
8.1
8.0
8.4
11.3
12.0
12.2
11.0
12.3
23.6
22.5
22.0
21.3
27.4
27.0
29.3
25.6
28.8
6.1
5.3
4.7
4.9
2.3
6.0
5.5
0.9
1.4
Acquittal (Trial)
Trials (Total) as a % of Case
Completions
Other Case Completions
Guilty as a % of Trial Outcomes
59.3
64.1
64.0
60.7
58.8
56.0
58.4
56.9
57.3
Acquittals as a % of Trial
Outcomes
40.7
35.9
36.0
39.3
41.2
44.0
41.6
43.1
42.7
Appeals to Court of Appeal, Supreme Court and High Court
Court of Appeal /
Supreme Court
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
227
231
252
281
279
296
302
290
291
7
7
2
7
6
10
11
9
8
234
238
254
288
285
306
313
299
299
1497
1424
1398
1645
1565
1620
1587
1862
1532
521
469
442
577
640
628
542
402
382
2018
1893
1840
2222
2205
2248
2129
2264
1914
High Court
Total Appeals
County Court appeals completed
Melbourne
Circuit Courts
Total
APPENDIX 5. CROWN PROSECUTOR PERFORMANCE IN 2007/08
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
Number of Crown
Prosecutors (FTE)
19.0
19.4
17.9
18.2
18.2
17.5
17.7
18.8
22.5
Days in Court Total
2450
2306
1826
2218
2428
2106
1904
2216
2280
129
119
102
122
133
120
108
118
101
52.4%
50.8%
43.9%
52.5%
59.6%
54.5%
50.8%
48.4%
41.9%
898
659
1238
1803
2643
2634
2371
2472
3095
Presentments by Number of
Crown Prosecutors
47
34
69
99
145
150
134
131
137
Advice re: plea offer Total
20
32
68
170
134
418
636
718
1241
1
2
4
9
7
24
36
38
55
278
215
1238
2461
3451
3137
3648
3390
4135
15
11
69
135
190
179
206
180
184
298
247
1306
2631
3585
3555
4284
4108
5376
16
13
73
144
197
203
242
218
239
Days in Court by Number of
Crown Prosecutors
Court Appearance %
Presentments Total
Advice re: plea offer by Number
of Crown Prosecutors
General advice Total
General advice by Number of
Crown Prosecutors
Advice Total
Advice Total by Number of
Crown Prosecutors
93
APPENDIX 5. CROWN PROSECUTOR PERFORMANCE IN 2007/08
PRESENTMENTS BY NUMBER
OF CROWN PROSECUTORS
ADVICE TOTAL BY NUMBER
GENERAL ADVICE BY NUMBER
ADVICE RE: PLEA OFFER BY NUMBER
APPENDIX 6. ASSISTANCE PROVIDED TO VICTIMS AND WITNESSES IN 2007/08
During 2007/08, the OPP’s Witness Assistance Service provided assistance to victims and witnesses across Victoria. Details of this
assistance are set out below.
Witness Assistance Service case referrals by category
Adult Sexual Assault
Armed Robbery
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
105
118
144
185
200
258
355
27
31
4
50
37
28
38
6
5
0
4
2
2
6
Attempted Murder
Arson
25
33
44
41
35
38
42
Burglary
16
27
25
24
14
18
21
CSA - Adult
93
119
120
139
144
171
222
CSA - Child
130
170
188
275
305
334
369
Coroner’s Inquest
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
Culpable Driving
34
47
50
47
54
55
77
0
0
0
0
1
5
13
Fraud
Dangerous Driving Causing Death
12
19
12
16
14
12
13
Murder-Mental Impairment Review
14
16
17
18
20
21
25
101
141
138
146
152
135
144
Other
39
33
31
43
40
46
69
Physical Assault - Adult
65
96
132
185
162
157
198
Physical Assault - Child
5
8
11
14
15
14
16
16
Murder/Homicide
Theft
0
0
9
14
8
11
Threat to Kill
4
4
4
5
6
10
17
676
867
929
1206
1209
1316
1642
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
237
327
380
504
505
551
547
Child under 10
49
103
109
105
118
114
109
Drug, Alcohol and Substance User
10
20
26
39
40
41
50
4
4
5
6
12
11
14
Intellectual Disability
17
23
35
49
44
52
57
NESB
97
147
174
183
165
129
124
Other
8
15
23
30
29
27
29
Physical Disability
31
32
35
33
33
50
60
Psychiatric Disability
21
30
28
49
45
58
58
Witness Assistance Service case referrals with special needs
Child 10-16
Hearing Impaired
Requires Interpreter
Sight Impaired
20
29
45
45
42
45
51
N/A
N/A
3
2
2
3
5
494
730
863
1045
1035
1081
1104
95
APPENDIX 7. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
Compliance with the Freedom of Information Act 1982
The Office of Public Prosecutions is subject to the Freedom of
Information Act 1982 (the Act).
Particulars of the functions and organisation of the OPP are set
out elsewhere in this Annual Report. The OPP’s website (www.
opp.vic.gov.au) provides additional information that might also be
of assistance in this regard.
Further information can be obtained from the Act, the various
regulations made under that Act and by visiting www.foi.vic.gov.au.
Freedom of Information requests during 2007/08
The Office of Public Prosecutions received 35 requests under the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 from 1 July 2007 to 30 June 2008.
The results of these requests were as follows:
Requests transferred to Victoria Police
1
Requests transferred to other Agencies
1
Request relating to documents not held
2
Access granted in full or in part
25
Access denied in full or in part
3
Further particulars sought in relation to request
–
Access not finalised at end of reporting period
3
Request withdrawn
–
Total
35
Categories of documents held by the OPP
The Office maintains electronic and paper based files. The
computerised case management system, PRISM, provides a
complete file registration and file management system. Files
are initially recorded when they are allocated a file number.
All details of the accused, addresses, sureties and witnesses are
entered. Further information is added as the matter progresses. A
paper based case file is maintained in every matter conducted on
behalf of the Director of Public Prosecutions. These files contain
court documents and records of all communications and work
undertaken in the particular matter.
The Bail and Breaches section maintains a spreadsheet of bail
applications, which records applications in chronological order
from the date of receipt of documents into the Office. This
section also maintains an index of files of breaches of noncustodial orders.
The Policy and Advice Directorate maintains an electronic
database that records all matters handled by this section.
The Human Resources section maintains an alphabetical index
of all persons employed in the Office, which also includes a brief
work history of each employee.
The Requisitions Book maintains a record of each order as it is
raised, its allocated number and details of the order, such as cost.
The Accounts Register (Non-Professional Assistance Register) is
a register of recurring expenditure (e.g. photocopying machine
rental). An entry is raised each time an invoice is received or goods
supplied to the Office.
The Professional Assistance Register is an alphabetical ledger of
all barristers briefed by the OPP, specialists, psychiatrists, court
reporting, accountants and other professional assistance and
contains details of claims made for payment after appearances at
court or provision of advice.
The Fixed Assets Register is a register of all assets owned by the
Office, including a description, cost and location of each item.
The Director’s Files cover a variety of subjects, including where the
Director’s consent is required to prosecute a matter, advice given
on various legal matters, answers given to public inquiries and
newspaper clippings on particular cases.
Administrative files contain material relevant to general office
issues and contain reports, correspondence and file notes for
subjects such as Freedom of Information legislation and transfer of
files to the Public Records Office.
Access to documents
The Freedom of Information Act 1982 aims to make the maximum
amount of information available to Victorians, promptly and
inexpensively. To facilitate this aim, applications must be as specific
and as precise as possible to enable quick identification and
searching for the relevant documents.
Access to information held by the OPP may only be
obtained through written request to the Office’s Freedom of
Information Officer. Delegated officers handle the processing
and determination of the application. The Solicitor for Public
Prosecutions handles any request for internal review.
An applicant may request photocopies of documents and/or
inspect specific documents at the Office by arrangement, or
by other access arrangements that may be appropriate to the
application. Applicants should provide a telephone number as a
point of contact for the Freedom of Information Officer to clarify
or discuss matters relating to the request.
The OPP can refuse to release all or part of a document if it
contains information that is exempt under the Act. The Act
outlines general categories of information that are exempt,
including information relating to the personal affairs of third
parties, information provided in confidence, information which if
released might endanger the lives or physical safety of individuals,
Cabinet documents, commercial-in-confidence information
and internal working documents, the release of which would be
contrary to the public interest.
Where the OPP decides to deny access to all or part of a
document, it will advise the applicant of the decision and the
reasons for the decision in an ‘Access Decision’ letter. If the
applicant wishes to challenge a decision of the OPP, he or she
may appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal or to the
Ombudsman if making a complaint about the way the request has
been handled.
Charges under the Act
The Act specifies that access to information be provided at the
lowest reasonable cost. Charges are:
• Application fee – a request must be accompanied by payment of $21
• Search fee – $20 per hour or part thereof (minimum fee of $5)
• Supervision fee – $10 per hour (where a document is inspected
by an applicant at the Office)
• Photocopy fee – $0.50 per A4 page
• Deposits – a deposit of $25 may be requested before the Office
will grant access if the calculated charge does not exceed $100.
If the calculated charge exceeds $100, a deposit of 50 per cent of
the calculated charge may be requested.
Some charges may be waived in certain circumstances: for
example, where the applicant is impecunious or the information
was accessed in the public interest.
Amendment of personal records
After a document containing information relating to the personal
affairs of a person has been released to that person, or in the case
of a deceased person, that person’s next of kin, the applicant can
request the correction of any information held on the file where
it is considered that this information is inaccurate, incomplete or
gives a misleading impression.
Requests for amendments must be made in writing and must
specify:• an address for service of notices;
• particulars of why the person making the request believes
the information to be incomplete, incorrect, out-of-date or
misleading; and
• the amendments he or she wishes to be made.
Where the Office accedes to the request, the record may be either
altered or amended by annotation. Where the Office refuses to
make the amendment, it must notify the applicant in writing of
the decision, advising of:
(a) the findings on any material questions of fact, the material on
which those findings were based and the reasons for the decision;
(b) the name and designation of the person making the decision; and
(c) the applicant’s rights of review to the Victorian Civil and
Administrative Tribunal in respect of the decision.
If the Tribunal affirms the Office’s decision, the applicant may
insist that a notation be made to the record specifying why he or
she claims the information it contains is incomplete or otherwise
inaccurate. The notation then becomes part of the document and
may be disclosed pursuant to the Act.
Nominated Officer/Contact Officer
Requests for access to documents in the Office of Public
Prosecutions under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 may be
directed to:
Freedom of Information Officer
9th Floor, 565 Lonsdale Street
MELBOURNE VIC 3000
APPENDIX 8. WHISTLEBLOWERS PROTECTION ACT 2001
The Office of Public Prosecutions is committed to the aims and
objectives of the Whistleblowers Protection Act 2001 (the Act). It
does not tolerate improper conduct by its employees and officers
or the taking of reprisals against those who come forward to
disclose such conduct.
The office recognises the value of transparency and accountability
in its administrative and management practices and supports
the making of disclosures that reveal corrupt conduct, conduct
involving a substantial mismanagement of public resources or
conduct involving a substantial risk to public health and safety or
the environment.
The OPP will take all necessary steps to protect people who make
such disclosures from any detrimental action in reprisal for making
the disclosure. It will also afford natural justice to the person who
is subject of the disclosure.
Compliance with the Whistleblowers Protection Act 2001
During 2007/08:
• The OPP has received no disclosures during the year.
• The OPP has not referred any disclosures to the Ombudsman for
determination as to whether they are public interest disclosures
during the year.
• The Ombudsman has not referred any disclosed matters to the
OPP during the year.
• The OPP has not referred any disclosed matters to the
Ombudsman to investigate during the year.
• The Ombudsman has not taken over any investigation of
disclosed matters from the OPP during the year.
• The OPP has made no request under s74 of the Act to the
Ombudsman to investigate disclosed matters during the year.
• The OPP has not declined to investigate a disclosed matter
during the year.
• There have been no disclosed matters that were substantiated
on investigation. There has been no action required to be
undertaken arising from an investigation, since there have been
no investigations.
• The Ombudsman has not made any recommendation under the
Act that relates to the OPP.
Reporting and investigation procedures
Written guidelines outlining procedures for reporting disclosure
of improper conduct or detrimental action by the OPP or its
employees is available for public perusal by contacting the
Protected Disclosure Coordinator.
Responsible officers
Disclosure of improper conduct or detrimental action by the OPP
or its employees may be made to the following officers:
The Protected Disclosure Coordinator
Name: Stuart Ward
Position: Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Acting)
Contact number: (03) 9603 7541
Protected Disclosure Officer
Names: Michael Hoyle
Position: General Manager, Corporate Services
Contact numbers: (03) 9603 7541
Alternatively, disclosures of improper conduct or detrimental
action by the OPP or its employees may also be made directly to
the Ombudsman.
The Ombudsman Victoria
Level 9, 459 Collins Street (North Tower)
MELBOURNE VIC 3000
Telephone: (03) 9613 6222
Toll Free: 1800 806 314
Internet: www. ombudvic@ ombudsman.vic.gov.au
97
APPENDIX 9. THE OPP WORKFORCE
As an office holder with the functions of an Agency Head under the Public Administration Act 2004, the Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
reports in compliance with the Directions issued by the Commissioner of the State Services Authority pursuant to s45(1)(d) of the Act.
The Office of Public Prosecutions forms part of the Justice portfolio and generally applies the same employment processes as those
applying within the Department of Justice. In relation to the specific reporting requirements set out in the Commissioner’s Directions,
the position is as follows:
Profile of OPP workforce
Aggregate workforce data as at 30 June 2008
Employment Status
Male
Female
Total Staff
Variation from
2006/07
Permanent
119.2
151.0
270.2
+59.5
Temporary
5.0
5.0
10
-1.9
Casual
2.0
1.0
3.0
+3.0
126.2
157.0
283.2
+60.6
TOTAL
Notes
1 Includes only staff on the payroll as at 30 June 2008
2 Staffing figures have been expressed as full time equivalents (FTE)
3 Staffing figures include two Executive Officers
4 Staffing figures do not include Governor in Council appointees. (Director, Solicitor, Crown Prosecutors)
5 Staffing figures include Articled Clerks
Classifications by gender as at 30 June 2008
Full-Time
Class.
Part-Time
Male
Female
Total
Variation
from
2006/07
Male
Female
Total
Variation
from
2006/07
TOTAL
FTE
1
0
1
–
0
0
0
–
1
Grade 6
45
18
63
+22
1.2
6.5
7.7
+1.7
70.7
Grade 5
29
29
58
+11
0
7.8
7.8
-0.6
65.8
Grade 4
15
20
35
+11
0
1.2
1.2
+0.6
36.2
Grade 3
18
37
55
+18
0
2.5
2.5
+1.1
57.5
Grade 2
17
32
49
+1
0
1.5
1.5
-0.3
50.5
Grade 1
0
0
0
-5
0
1.5
1.5
+0.1
1.5
TOTAL
125
136
261
+58
1.2
21.0
22.2
+2.6
283.2
Sen Tech Spec
Notes
1 Includes only staff on the payroll as at 30 June 2008
2 Staffing figures have been expressed as full time equivalents (FTE)
3 Staffing figures include two Executive Officers
4 Staffing figures do not include Governor in Council appointees. (Director, Solicitor, Crown Prosecutors)
5 Staffing figures include Articled Clerks
Profile of executive officers by gender as at 30 June 2008
Classification
Male
Variation from
2006/07
Female
Variation from
2006/07
Total
Variation from
2006/07
E0-3
2
+1
0
0
2
+1
E0-2
0
0
1
0
1
0
E0-1
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
2
+1
1
0
3
+1
Merit and equity programs
Selecting on merit
The Solicitor for Public Prosecutions made six appointments
without general advertisement during 2007/08. These
appointments were as a result of appointing candidates to
positions with identical duties and requirements to those of
positions advertised in the Victorian Public Service Notices.
Reviewing personal grievances
The Office of Public Prosecutions received four Personal Grievance
Applications during 2007/08, all of which were related to
promotional opportunities.
Managing and valuing diversity
The Office of Public Prosecutions was unable to continue to
participate in the Victorian Government’s Youth Employment
Initiative due to lack of suitable accommodations, but may
participate again next year. Over the past six years the office has
conducted varied training programs that enable trainees to gain
experience and exposure to a number of administrative areas of
the office. All new appointees to the office are included in a formal
two-day Induction Program. This program includes the provision
of information relating to the Code of Conduct and other aspects
of employment.
Upholding public sector conduct
The Code of Conduct issued by the Commissioner of the State
Services Authority under s.45(1)(d) of the Public Administration
Act 2004 has been issued to all existing staff and is provided
to all new appointees. A Code of Conduct for OPP staff is also
published in the Office Manual.
All employees of the Office with current or future responsibilities
for purchasing goods and/or services or contracting external
service providers have attended or are progressively attending
relevant contract management courses. This ensures that staff
have a clear understanding of probity and integrity issues and
relevant processes.
Employee relations
The OPP is a party to the Public Sector Enterprise Partnership
Agreement. During 2007/08, senior management have continued
to meet with the Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU)
to keep them informed of various issues at the OPP. Recognising
that major change can be stressful for staff, the OPP also formed
a Consultative Committee to deal with issues arising from the
day-to-day impact of the office’s major reorganisation program on
staff. The committee includes representation from the CPSU.
There have been no industrial disputes during the year.
APPENDIX 10. OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY
In accordance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 and
the Office of Public Prosecutions Human Resource Management
Policies and Guidelines, the OPP continues in its endeavours to
provide a working environment for all staff members and visitors
that is safe and without risk to health.
• Continued to provide financial assistance to staff who, due to
computerisation of the office, require spectacles for their use of
computers
The OPP has established an OH&S Committee, comprising 16
members of staff and three management representatives, to:
• Reviewed the number and requirements of First Aid Officers and
provided additional training and provisions where necessary
• improve cooperation in instigating, developing and carrying out
measures designed to ensure the occupational health and safety
of staff, and
• Continued to provide a ‘Manual Handling’ training course for
staff engaged in lifting or carrying heavy files
• formulate, review and disseminate the standards, rules and
procedures relating to occupational health and safety that must
be carried out or complied with in the OPP workplace.
• Continued to provide an Influenza Vaccination Program to
reduce the possibility of staff suffering influenza
• Continued to regularly review all office:
– policies and procedures relating to OH&S key performance
indicators;
This Committee meets monthly or as needed.
– reporting registers of injuries and causes of accidents;
During 2007/08, the OPP:
– WorkCover claims; and
• Continued to offer an Employee Assistance Program that assists
staff by providing short term professional counselling and
consulting for employees and members of their immediate family
who face problems of a personal, family or employment nature
– rehabilitation and early return to work practices.
99
APPENDIX 11. ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTING
Commitment to sustainable practices
The Office of Public Prosecutions has a strong commitment to
reducing energy consumption, using environmentally sustainable
products and developing sustainable strategies. The OPP has
commenced a program to reduce the environmental impact of its
operations by implementing initiatives that have an immediate
environmental payback. Key initiatives that have been undertaken
by the OPP during 2007/08 include:
• Significant investment in multi-function devices to allow duplex
printing (leading to a reduction of more than 25 percent in paper
consumption per staff member)
• Purchasing A4 paper with minimum 50 per cent recycled content
• Refurbishing 400 task and visitor chairs (rather than replacing
with new ones)
• Purchasing new dishwashers with minimum four-star water and
energy performance
• Working with the Department of Treasury and Finance to
upgrade the 565 Lonsdale Street building through a $5 million
Energy Performance Contracting (EPC) project
• Training key Facilities Management staff under the Department
of Sustainability and Environment’s ResourceSmart Government
program.
Environmental report for 2007/08
This environmental report covers two Office of Public
Prosecutions office locations1, where over 99 per cent of officebased staff members are located. This information has been
prepared in accordance with the Financial Reporting Directions
issued by the Minister for Finance (FRD24B).
ENERGY
2007/08
Indicator
Total energy usage segmented by primary source (MJ)1
Greenhouse gas emissions associated with energy
use (t CO2-e)2
Percentage of electricity purchased as Green Power
Units of energy used per FTE (MJ/FTE)3
Units of energy used per unit of office area (MJ/m2)
2006/07
Electricity
Natural
Gas
Green
Power
Electricity
Natural
Gas
Green
Power
1,887,631
1,301,236
159,687
1,445,008
1,261,165
173,397
629
75
0
468
80
0
8%
11%
11,824
12,994
455
411
Notes on energy data
1 Data was provided by Brookfield Multiplex (on behalf of the
Department of Treasury and Finance, owner of 565 Lonsdale Street)
and Knight Frank (building agent for 575 Bourke Street) and includes
tenancy light and power use at both OPP CBD offices. Due to leasing
arrangements, base building energy consumption is not reported.
2 The greenhouse gas emissions have been calculated using the
Australian Greenhouse Office (AGO) Factors and Methods Workbook.
GreenPower is not included as this is carbon neutral.
3 The OPP’s FTE as at 30 June 2008 is used for environmental reporting.
Actions taken to reduce energy consumption
All PCs within 565 Lonsdale Street and 575 Bourke Street have been
swapped from CRT to LCD monitors and are programmed to power
down to stand by mode after 30 minutes of inactivity.
WASTE
2007/08
1
Indicator
Total units of waste disposed of by destination (kg/year)
Landfill
Recycled
Compost
16,834
28,331
1,442
Units of waste disposed of per FTE by destinations (kg/FTE)2
59.4
100.0
5.1
Recycling rate (per cent of total waste)
64%
Greenhouse gas emissions associated with waste disposal (t CO2-e)
34
Notes on waste data
1 Estimate for the OPP waste was extrapolated from data for 565
Lonsdale Street provided by Brookfield Multiplex staff (on behalf of
the Department of Treasury and Finance).
Actions taken to reduce waste consumption
The OPP has implemented a process of secure document disposal that
enables waste paper to be recycled. Previously, all secure documents
were destroyed in such a manner the by-product could not be re-used.
2 The OPP’s FTE as at 30 June 2008 is used for environmental reporting.
PAPER
Indicator
2007/08
2006/07
8,965
9,722
Units of copy paper used per FTE (reams/FTE)
31.7
43.9
Percentage of 75-100% recycled content copy paper purchased (%)1
12%
61%
18%
Total units of copy paper used (reams)
Notes on paper usage data
1 Due to a change in supplier accurate benchmark figures for 2006/07
are not available.
Actions taken to reduce paper consumption
Paper use by staff based within 565 Lonsdale Street and 575 Bourke
Street has reduced by over 10 reams per person since 2006/07
– a reduction in excess of 25 per cent. This is due to the introduction
of multifunction devices and duplex printing throughout the offices, in
addition to a staff education program.
WATER
Indicator
1
Total units of metered water consumed by usage types (kilolitres)
Units of metered water consumed in offices per FTE (kilolitres/FTE)
Units of metered water consumed in offices per unit of office area (kilolitres/m2))
2007/08
2006/07
3,527,104
4,542,210
12,454
20,497
503
648
Notes on water consumption data
1 Data was provided by Jones Lang LaSalle (on behalf of the
Department of Treasury and Finance, owner of 565 Lonsdale Street)
and Knight Frank (building agent for 575 Bourke Street) and
apportioned from total building water consumption by floor area.
Actions taken to reduce water consumption
• As part of the ongoing upgrade of its building facilities, the OPP has
purchased new dishwashers with minimum four-star water and 5
star energy performance.
• The OPP has been working with the Department of Treasury and
Finance’s property manager to ensure a rapid response to waterrelated faults.
• The OPP has commenced working with the Department of Treasury
and Finance to upgrade the 565 Lonsdale Street building through a $5
million Energy Performance Contracting (EPC) project.
101
TRANSPORT
2007/08
Vehicles
2006/07
Executive Operational Operational
6 cylinder
6 cylinder
4 cylinder
Total
All Fleet
Total energy consumption by vehicles (MJ)
588,294
1,257,626
148,336
1,994,256
1,937,659
Total vehicle travel associated with entity operations (km)
152,497
334,859
43,811
531,168
435,821
43
92
11
146
147
0.28
0.27
0.25
0.27
0.34
2007/08
2006/07
83
82
Total greenhouse gas emissions from vehicle fleet (t CO2-e)
Greenhouse gas emissions from vehicle fleet per 1,000km
travelled (t CO2-e)
Total distance travelled by aeroplane (km)1
Percentage of CBD employees regularly (>75 per cent of
work attendance days) using public transport, cycling,
walking, or car pooling to and from work or working from
home, by locality type2
Notes on transportation data
1 Air travel by all Department of Justice entities, including the OPP, is consolidated by the Department of Treasury and Finance and reported in the
Department of Justice annual report.
2 Derived from a survey of OPP employees based in 565 Lonsdale Street, Melbourne.
Actions taken to reduce vehicle emissions
• Public transport tickets have been purchased for staff travel to and from external meetings.
• Replacement of three 6-cylinder fleet cars with two 4-cylinder cars and a LPG car.
• The Victorian Government invests in activities such as tree planting and fuel switching to offset the CO2 emissions from its vehicle fleet.
Contracting the supply of offsets for all Victorian Government vehicles is the responsibility of the Department of Sustainability and Environment.
Offsetting is done in arrears and is based on actual fuel usage data.
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Indicator
2007/08
Total greenhouse gas emissions associated with energy use (t CO2-e)
703
Total greenhouse gas emissions associated with vehicle fleet (t CO2-e)
146
Total greenhouse gas emissions associated with air travel (t CO2-e)1
Total greenhouse gas emissions associated with waste production (t CO2 e)
34
Greenhouse gas emissions offsets purchased (t CO2-e)2
Notes on greenhouse gas emission data
1 Air travel by all Department of Justice entities, including the OPP, is consolidated by the Department of Treasury and Finance and reported in the
Department of Justice annual report.
2 The Victorian Government invests in activities such as tree planting and fuel switching to offset the CO2 emissions from its vehicle fleet.
Contracting the supply of offsets for all Victorian Government vehicles is the responsibility of the Department of Sustainability and Environment.
APPENDIX 12. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
1. AUDIT COMMITTEE
The members of the Audit Committee are listed below.
Independent Members
R. Elvins – Chairman
M. Carter – Non-Executive Member
Executive Members
M. Hoyle – General Manager, Corporate Services
R. Gray – Directorate Manager, Briefing Services and Appeals
Audit Committee Charter – Function, Role
and Duties of the Audit Committee
The role and responsibilities of the Audit Committee and its
members are set out in the Audit Committee Charter.
The Audit Committee provides advice to the Solicitor to assist
in the effective discharge of responsibilities prescribed in the
Financial Management Act 1994 and Audit Act 1994 and other
relevant legislation.
The main responsibilities of the Audit Committee are to:
• Review and report independently to the Solicitor and Minister
on the annual report and all other financial information
published by the Office
• Assist the Solicitor in reviewing the effectiveness of the Office’s
internal control environment covering:
– effectiveness and efficiency of operations;
– reliability of financial reporting; and
– compliance with applicable laws and regulations
• Determine the scope of the internal audit coverage and ensure
that its resources are adequate and used effectively, including
coordination with the external auditors
• Oversee the effective operation of the risk management
framework.
2. CONSULTANCIES
Disclosure Statement
Summary of consultancies engaged in 2007-08:
A. Consultancies with a value greater than $100,000
The table below lists consultants engaged in 2007/08 where the
cost of the engagement was $100,000 or above.
Consultant
L Cohen Consulting
Project
Total approved project
fee $’000
Expenditure 2007/08
$’000 (excl GST)
Future expenditure
$’000
Advice on organisation
transition and
implementation
209
202
7
B. Consultancies less than $100,000
Number of engagements 3
Total value of expenditure (excluding GST) $227,491
103
APPENDIX 13. STATEMENT OF AVAILABILITY OF OTHER INFORMATION
In compliance with the requirements of the Ministerial Directions of the Minister for Finance, details in respect of the information items
listed below have been retained by the Office of Public Prosecutions and are available to the relevant Ministers, Members of Parliament
and the public (subject to Freedom of Information requirements, if applicable). However, in adopting best practice disclosure policies
and to ensure that the Office of Public Prosecutions discharges its accountability obligations, where relevant, details about some of the
following items have been disclosed within this Report of Operations:
(a) a statement that declarations of pecuniary interest have been duly completed by all relevant officers of the Office of Public
Prosecutions
(b) details of shares held by senior officers as nominee or held beneficially in a statutory authority or subsidiary
(c) details of publications produced by the Office of Public Prosecutions about its activities and where they can be obtained
(d) details of changes in prices, fees, charges, rates and levies charged by the Office of Public Prosecutions for its services, including
services that are administered
(e) details of any major external reviews carried out in respect of the operation of the Office of Public Prosecutions
(f) details of any other research and development activities undertaken by the Office of Public Prosecutions that are not otherwise
covered in this Report of Operations or in a document which contains the financial report and Report of Operations
(g) details of overseas visits undertaken including a summary of the objectives and outcomes of each visit
(h) details of major promotional, public relations and marketing activities undertaken by the Office of Public Prosecutions to develop
community awareness of the services provided by the office
(i) details of assessments and measures undertaken to improve the occupational health and safety of employees, not otherwise detailed
in the Report of Operations
(j) a general statement on industrial relations within the Office of Public Prosecutions and details of time lost through industrial
accidents and disputes, which is not otherwise detailed in the Report of Operations
(k) a list of major committees sponsored by the Office of Public Prosecutions, the purposes of each committee and the extent to which
the purposes have been achieved.
This information is available from:
Projects and Performance Unit
565 Lonsdale Street
Melbourne VIC 3000
Telephone: (03) 9603 7569
APPENDIX 14. DISCLOSURE INDEX
The Annual Report of the Office of Public Prosecutions is prepared in accordance with Victorian legislation. This index has been prepared
to facilitate identification of the Office’s compliance with statutory disclosure requirements.
Legislation
Requirement
Page reference
Ministerial Directions
Report of operations – FRD Guidance
Charter and Purpose
FRD 22B
Manner of establishment and the relevant Ministers
FRD 22B
Objectives, functions, powers and duties
FRD 22B
Nature and range of services provided
11, 80
3, 4, 11, 19
3, 11, 19, 22 – 23
Management and structure
FRD 22B
Organisational structure
22 – 23
Financial and other information
FRD 22B
Operational and budgetary objectives and performance against objectives
90, 92 – 95
FRD 22B
Statement of workforce data and merit and equity
FRD 22B
99
FRD 15B
Executive officer disclosures
81
FRD 22B
Summary of the financial results for the year
FRD 22B
Major changes or factors affecting performance
FRD 22B
Subsequent events
25 – 60
FRD 22B
Application and operation of Freedom of Information Act 1982
96 – 97
FRD 22B
Application and operation of Whistleblowers Protection Act 2001
FRD 22B
Details of consultancies over $100,000
103
FRD 22B
Details of consultancies under $100,000
103
FRD 24B
Reporting of office-based environmental impacts
FRD 22B
Statement of availability of other information
104
FRD 10
Disclosure index
105
98 – 99
64
25 – 60
97
100 – 102
Financial Statements
Financial statement required under Part 7 of the FMA
SD 4.2(b)
Operating Statement
65
SD 4.2(b)
Balance Sheet
66
SD 4.2(a)
Statement of changes in equity
67
SD 4.2(b)
Cash flow Statement
67
Other requirements under Standing Directions 4.2
SD 4.2(c)
Accountable officer’s declaration
64, 85
SD 4.2(c)
Compliance with Australian accounting standards and other administrative pronouncements
68, 88
SD 4.2(c)
Compliance with Ministerial Directions
SD 4.2(d)
Rounding of amounts
68 – 70
70
Other disclosures as required by FRDs in notes to the financial statements
FRD 21A
Responsible person and executive officer disclosures
81
Legislation
Freedom of Information Act 1982
96 – 97
Whistleblowers Protection Act 2001
Financial Management Act 1994
97
64, 68, 80, 85, 103
Audit Act 1994
103
FRD is a Financial Reporting Direction issued by the Minister for Finance pursuant to section 8 of the Financial Management Act 1994 and
Regulation 16 of the Financial Management Act 2004. Compliance with FRDs is mandatory.
SD is a Standing Direction under the Financial Management Act 2004. Compliance with SDs is mandatory.
105
GLOSSARY AND ABBREVIATIONS
Accused
A person charged with a crime is called the defendant in a
Magistrates’ Court and the accused in the Supreme Court
and the County Court
A-IFRS
Australian Equivalent to International Financial Reporting
Standards
Bail
A commitment given to the court to secure the release of
a person being held in custody and suspected of a crime,
guaranteeing that the person will appear to answer the
charges at a later date
Bar
A professional organisation for lawyers who work as Barristers
Barrister
A lawyer who appears at court, acting for either the
prosecution or the defence
CCTV
Closed-Circuit Television
CJEP
Criminal Justice Enhancement Program
CLE
Continuing Legal Education
Committal hearing
A hearing conducted in a Magistrates’Court to determine
whether there is enough evidence for a trial before a judge
and jury
Non-custodial order
An order made by a court in sentencing a defendant that
does not involve imprisonment
OH&S
Occupational Health and Safety
OPI
Office of Police Integrity – Victoria’s independent police
anti-corruption and oversight body
OPP
Office of Public Prosecutions – the office consisting of
lawyers and support staff who work for the Director of
Public Prosecutions
Plea
An accused person can plead ‘guilty’ or ‘not guilty’
Plea hearing
A hearing held before a judge or magistrate (either after
an accused person has been found guilty by a jury or after
electing to plead guilty) at which submissions in relation
to sentence are made and Victim Impact Statements are
given to the court
Police informant
The police officer in charge of the criminal investigation
and the main contact between police and the victim
PRISM
Prosecution Recording and Information System
Prosecutor
A barrister for the Director of Public Prosecutions who
calls witnesses and presents evidence in court to show that
a person is guilty.
QC
Queen’s Counsel – senior barristers who appear in court
or advise in particularly complex or difficult cases (replaced
by the title of Senior Counsel in 2000)
Restraining order
A court order that can be taken out by the Director
of Public Prosecutions over an offender’s property. A
restraining order stops the offender from disposing of the
property, preserving it for any future compensation order
that might by made by a court.
Conviction
A person is convicted when they are found guilty by a jury
or plead guilty before a judge or magistrate
County Court
A judge presides over this court. It hears serious cases
(indictable offences) and a jury decides the case.
CPSU
Community and Public Sector Union
Crown Prosecutor
A prosecutor who works solely for the Director of Public
Prosecutions
CSA
Child Sexual Assault
Defendant
A person who has been charged with a crime is called the
defendant in a Magistrates’ Court
SC
Senior Counsel – senior barristers who appear in court or
advise in particularly complex or difficult cases
Double jeopardy
The principle that a person may not be tried or sentenced
twice for the same offence
SD
Standing Direction
Sen Tech Spec
Senior Technical Specialist
Solicitor
A lawyer who prepares a case to go to court
SPP
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions – the head of the Office of
Public Prosecutions
Executive Officer
SSOU
Specialist Sex Offences Unit
Ethical Standards Department (Victoria Police)
Statutory authority
A body established under an Act of Parliament
Extradition
The arrest and return of a person wanted for a crime
committed in another state or country
Summary offences
Crimes where the charges against the defendant are heard
in a Magistrates’ Court
FRD
Financial Reporting Direction
Supreme Court
FTE
Full Time Equivalent
This court is the superior court in Victoria and hears the
most serious cases. The court is divided into two divisions
– the Court of Appeal and the Trial Division. The Court
of Appeal hears appeals from trials heard by Judges of
the Supreme Court and the County Court. The Criminal
Division of the Trial Division hears major criminal matters.
Trial
A court hearing held in the County Court or Supreme
Court before a judge and jury
Verdict
A decision given by a jury, which tells the court whether a
person is guilty or not guilty
DOJ
DPP
EO
ESD
Department of Justice (Victoria)
Director of Public Prosecutions – the person who is
responsible for prosecuting serious (indictable) offences
in Victoria
High Court of Australia The highest court in the Australian judicial system. The
functions of the High Court are to interpret and apply
the law of Australia, to decide cases of special federal
significance (including challenges to the constitutional
validity of laws) and to hear appeals, by special leave, from
Federal, State and Territory courts.
HR
Human Resources
Indictable offences
Crimes where the defendant has the right to a trial where
guilt or innocence is determined by a jury
IT
Information Technology
Judgment
The final order or set of orders made by a judge after a
court hearing
Jury
A group of 12 people who are chosen to decide who is
guilty or not guilty in a County Court or Supreme Court trial
LPS
Legal Prosecution Specialist (a position within the OPP)
Magistrates’ Court
The court that hears the less serious cases (summary
offences) and does not use a jury
NESB
Non-English Speaking Background
Nolle prosequi
An application made by the prosecution in a criminal case
to discontinue proceedings
Victim Impact Statement A statement that can be made by a victim of crime to the
court when an offender is being sentenced. The statement
informs the court of how the crime has affected the victim
and is taken into account by the court when sentencing
the offender.
VLRC
Victorian Law Reform Commission
WAS
Witness Assistance Service
Witness
A person who appears in a court to tell what he or she
knows about a crime or other event
FINANCIAL REPORT OF THE
AND APPENDICES*
These sections are available on CD in some
versions of this report
565 Lonsdale Street
Melbourne VIC 3000
PO Box 13085
Melbourne VIC 8010
DX 210290
T: (03) 9603 7666
F: (03) 9603 7430
E: [email protected]
www.opp.vic.gov.au

- Office of Public Prosecutions

Transcription

Similar documents

Tiens Group Global

OPP OPP

Map 8c Area from which Beckford`s Tower is Visible (Landmark 2)

CMMI Institute conference submission

a pilotless project

3 - Lavination

Map 8b Area Visible from the Viewpoint at Beckford`s Tower

VWTH Spring 2012 Newsletter - Victoria Women`s Transition House

E236N Tool PreSetter

Gazette051713 - PAnet