Hon Lynn MacLaren questions the Attorney General regarding the proposed extinguishment of convictions for historical homosexual offences, seeking details on the scope, process, and potential apology. The Attorney General provides a limited response, citing ongoing cabinet submission development and confusion regarding a specific legal reference.

AnsweredQoN 1346Legislative Council
Asked
17 November 2016
Portfolio
Attorney General

QuestionView source ↗

HISTORICAL HOMOSEXUAL OFFENCES — EXTINGUISHMENT OF CONVICTIONS
1346. Hon LYNN MacLAREN to the Attorney General:
I refer to public comments made by
the Attorney General within the past week regarding the extinguishment of
convictions for historical homosexual offences in Western Australia.
(1) Can the
Attorney General please list the specific convictions that will be expunged
under the government's proposal?
(2) How many of those convictions,
in total, currently stand in Western Australia?
(3) Will the
expungements also be applied to men charged with offences under the Criminal
Code Act Compilation Act 1913, section 377A(2), between 7 December 1989 and 21 March
2002, when the age of consent was equalised?
(4) Will the
expungement process include the destroying of fingerprint records and other
evidence currently held against ''offenders''?
(5) Will the
government also offer a formal apology to men charged with offences as part of
the expungement process?
(6) When does the Attorney General
expect that the cabinet submission will be reviewed by cabinet?

AnswerView source ↗

I thank the honourable member for some notice of the question.
(1)–(5) A
cabinet submission for a legislative scheme for the extinguishment of
convictions for historical homosexual offences is currently under development.
(6) The cabinet
submission will be considered by cabinet in the near future.
I should add that I am a little
confused by the reference to section 377A(2). There is no section 377A(2).
Section 377 was a curious provision relating to stealing the property of
spouses. If it was a typo and section 277 was meant, that provision involves
the definitions of ''homicide'' and categories of homicide. If it
was section 177, it has to do with disobedience to statute law! I cannot help
the member with that one.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more