Victoria needs to catch up on double jeopardy reform

(Letter submitted to The Age newpaper, which The Age did not publish.)

Julian Burnside (Opinion, 6 June) is incorrect in claiming the Baillieu government plans to “abolish the ‘double jeopardy’ rule” in criminal proceedings.

 Last week the Government confirmed its pre-election policy to make limited changes to double jeopardy laws.  The changes will allow a new trial to be ordered where new and compelling evidence becomes available that shows a person acquitted of a serious crime was in fact guilty.

 Any decision to order a new trial could only be made upon application by the Director of Public Prosecutions and where the Court of Appeal is satisfied it is in the interests of justice to do so.

 This legislation was agreed to by the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) in 2007.  NSW, Queensland, South Australia and Tasmania have already legislated, as have England and New Zealand.  The previous Victorian government failed to do so.

 The rule of double jeopardy is an important principle to protect innocent citizens from repeated prosecutions.  However, it is also important that persons acquitted should not be able literally to “get away with murder” or other serious crimes where compelling new evidence of guilt emerges.

 Robert Clark
Attorney General