❓ A WA parliamentary question examines whether WA law adequately addresses the destruction of evidence, following Victoria's enactment of the Crimes (Document Destruction) Act 2006. The Attorney General's representative asserts that existing WA law (Section 132 of the Criminal Code) is sufficient and no amendment is currently needed.
AnsweredQoN 823Legislative Council
Asked
26 September 2006
Member
Portfolio
parliamentary secretary representing the Attorney General
QuestionView source ↗
DESTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE - CRIMINAL OFFENCE
On 1 September 2006 the Crimes (Document Destruction) Act 2006 came into effect in Victoria and created a new criminal offence relating to the destruction of evidence. The amendment to the Victorian Crimes Act 1958 follows the decision of the Victorian Court of Appeal in British American Tobacco Australia Services Ltd v Cowell as representing the estate of Rolah Ann McCabe, deceased, and the subsequent report by Professor Peter Sallman on “Document Destruction and Civil Litigation in Victoria”. Does the existing law in Western Australia provide an offence in similar terms to the Victorian Crimes Act 1958; if not, will the government consider a similar amendment in Western Australia, and, if not, why not? Hon SUE ELLERY
On 1 September 2006 the Crimes (Document Destruction) Act 2006 came into effect in Victoria and created a new criminal offence relating to the destruction of evidence. The amendment to the Victorian Crimes Act 1958 follows the decision of the Victorian Court of Appeal in British American Tobacco Australia Services Ltd v Cowell as representing the estate of Rolah Ann McCabe, deceased, and the subsequent report by Professor Peter Sallman on “Document Destruction and Civil Litigation in Victoria”. Does the existing law in Western Australia provide an offence in similar terms to the Victorian Crimes Act 1958; if not, will the government consider a similar amendment in Western Australia, and, if not, why not? Hon SUE ELLERY
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. The report by Professor Sallman recommended that Victoria enact a provision based on section 39 of the commonwealth Crimes Act. The provision of the commonwealth act is in materially the same terms as section 132 of the Western Australian Criminal Code, which provides - 132. Destroying evidence Any person who, knowing that any book, document, or other thing of any kind, is or may be required in evidence in a judicial proceeding, wilfully destroys it or renders it illegible or undecipherable or incapable of identification, with intent thereby to prevent it from being used in evidence, is guilty of a crime, and is liable to imprisonment for 7 years. No amendment to this Western Australian provision is considered to be necessary at this stage.
Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. The report by Professor Sallman recommended that Victoria enact a provision based on section 39 of the commonwealth Crimes Act. The provision of the commonwealth act is in materially the same terms as section 132 of the Western Australian Criminal Code, which provides - 132. Destroying evidence Any person who, knowing that any book, document, or other thing of any kind, is or may be required in evidence in a judicial proceeding, wilfully destroys it or renders it illegible or undecipherable or incapable of identification, with intent thereby to prevent it from being used in evidence, is guilty of a crime, and is liable to imprisonment for 7 years. No amendment to this Western Australian provision is considered to be necessary at this stage.
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. The report by Professor Sallman recommended that Victoria enact a provision based on section 39 of the commonwealth Crimes Act. The provision of the commonwealth act is in materially the same terms as section 132 of the Western Australian Criminal Code, which provides - 132. Destroying evidence Any person who, knowing that any book, document, or other thing of any kind, is or may be required in evidence in a judicial proceeding, wilfully destroys it or renders it illegible or undecipherable or incapable of identification, with intent thereby to prevent it from being used in evidence, is guilty of a crime, and is liable to imprisonment for 7 years. No amendment to this Western Australian provision is considered to be necessary at this stage.
The report by Professor Sallman recommended that Victoria enact a provision based on section 39 of the commonwealth Crimes Act. The provision of the commonwealth act is in materially the same terms as section 132 of the Western Australian Criminal Code, which provides - 132. Destroying evidence Any person who, knowing that any book, document, or other thing of any kind, is or may be required in evidence in a judicial proceeding, wilfully destroys it or renders it illegible or undecipherable or incapable of identification, with intent thereby to prevent it from being used in evidence, is guilty of a crime, and is liable to imprisonment for 7 years. No amendment to this Western Australian provision is considered to be necessary at this stage.
Any person who, knowing that any book, document, or other thing of any kind, is or may be required in evidence in a judicial proceeding, wilfully destroys it or renders it illegible or undecipherable or incapable of identification, with intent thereby to prevent it from being used in evidence, is guilty of a crime, and is liable to imprisonment for 7 years.
Hon SUE ELLERY replied: I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. The report by Professor Sallman recommended that Victoria enact a provision based on section 39 of the commonwealth Crimes Act. The provision of the commonwealth act is in materially the same terms as section 132 of the Western Australian Criminal Code, which provides - 132. Destroying evidence Any person who, knowing that any book, document, or other thing of any kind, is or may be required in evidence in a judicial proceeding, wilfully destroys it or renders it illegible or undecipherable or incapable of identification, with intent thereby to prevent it from being used in evidence, is guilty of a crime, and is liable to imprisonment for 7 years. No amendment to this Western Australian provision is considered to be necessary at this stage.
I thank the honourable member for some notice of this question. The report by Professor Sallman recommended that Victoria enact a provision based on section 39 of the commonwealth Crimes Act. The provision of the commonwealth act is in materially the same terms as section 132 of the Western Australian Criminal Code, which provides - 132. Destroying evidence Any person who, knowing that any book, document, or other thing of any kind, is or may be required in evidence in a judicial proceeding, wilfully destroys it or renders it illegible or undecipherable or incapable of identification, with intent thereby to prevent it from being used in evidence, is guilty of a crime, and is liable to imprisonment for 7 years. No amendment to this Western Australian provision is considered to be necessary at this stage.
The report by Professor Sallman recommended that Victoria enact a provision based on section 39 of the commonwealth Crimes Act. The provision of the commonwealth act is in materially the same terms as section 132 of the Western Australian Criminal Code, which provides - 132. Destroying evidence Any person who, knowing that any book, document, or other thing of any kind, is or may be required in evidence in a judicial proceeding, wilfully destroys it or renders it illegible or undecipherable or incapable of identification, with intent thereby to prevent it from being used in evidence, is guilty of a crime, and is liable to imprisonment for 7 years. No amendment to this Western Australian provision is considered to be necessary at this stage.
Any person who, knowing that any book, document, or other thing of any kind, is or may be required in evidence in a judicial proceeding, wilfully destroys it or renders it illegible or undecipherable or incapable of identification, with intent thereby to prevent it from being used in evidence, is guilty of a crime, and is liable to imprisonment for 7 years.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.