Child Sex Tourism Bill In Australia Essay

, Research Paper

Child Sex Tourism Bill in Australia

On March 23rd 1994 the Child Sex Tourism bill was introduced into the House

of Representatives. This act, which amended the Crimes Act of 1914, enabling the

Australian government to prosecute Australian child sex offenders overseas.

Before the introduction of this new legislation, if an offence was committed

overseas and not punished whilst in the country, Australian law officials were

powerless.

The proposed changes in the law are to deal with the following issues:

Firstly sexual offences committed by Australian Residents overseas, particularly

in relation to acts of paedophilia committed within the major trouble spot, Asia.

This section refers to anyone who commits a sexual act on a child under the age

of sixteen, at the time that the offence was committed. Also the changes intend

to deal with organisations that may run or promote child sex tours, such as

travel agencies and the like, who have specifically run sex tour packages.

Defences to these offences such as stating that the defendant had no knowledge

of the child’s age will be also targeted, as currently, this is a major

stumbling block on the course to justice. Finally to save time and cost, video

link hearings will be setup between the child in question overseas, and the

Australian courts.

The changes stated above were required to not only protect abused children

residing overseas, but to prove that the Australian Government is in touch with

the community values within Australian cities. The amendments made to the law

were needed because of the shameful amount of Australians indulging in sex

practices with minors in countries other than Australia. Before the law was

amended the general feeling among those involved in the process was that the

Child Sex Tourism Act would have to carry severe penalties with it. The reason

for such hefty penalties is that the law had the potential to be more of a

deterrent to ‘would be’ offenders and to also reflect the desire of the

Australian community. It was obvious ever since the Act was drafted that it

would, by no means, be an easy law to enforce.

Within the Australian community many high ranking authorities expressed

their attitudes towards the new law publicly. Several of the comments spoken

appeared one sided, also, many conflicted with opinions already offered to the

public in regard to fair trials.

“If Parliaments adopted this (Bill) it would be an absolute outrage, firstly,

because you would have people wanting it in other legislation. You would throw

aside 200 years of criminal justice with fairness for the accused. Fairness for

the accused is also fairness for the community.” This statement was expressed by

Mr. John Dowd. Another statement that supports the argument Mr. John Dowd

presents, is the response Mr. Martin Sides, QC, offers. “It is my view that

there are significant and powerful procedures that are not available to accused

persons or, for that matter, the prosecution, in this legislative scheme.”

In conflict with the views of Mr. John Dowd and Mr. Martin Sides, Senator

Margaret Reynolds presented this argument. “I do not propose to comment on the

technicalities of the Bill except to emphasise that it is essential that the

intention of the Bill be fully maximised. The significance of the Bill’s

deterrent effect must not be jeopardised by any legal uncertainty which could

result in an unsuccessful prosecution.”

The first two statements mentioned in the above paragraphs offer the view

that the Bill will obstruct the right of an individual to undergo a far trial.

In conflict with these statements, Senator Margaret Reynolds accentuates that

the Bill enforced with its full potential, as act as a deterrent, against ‘would

be’ offenders. She expressed that if this task is accomplished, there would be

no question of an unfair trial.

During the campaign to introduce the new act into the law, many groups of

individuals and institutions played an active role in the process of introducing

the new law. Whether their part be major or minor, all of the institutions

mentioned in the following paragraphs helped to introduce the amendment into the

Crimes Act.

ECPAT is a well known institution that has played a leading role in the

campaign to stop child sex tourism in Asia; as the name suggests: ECPAT (End

Child Prostitution In Asian Tourism). ECPAT consists of several community minded

groups who all gel together to shape a well rounded institution with a lot of

influence within the nation. The institution as a whole carried out an education

campaign within Australia. This education campaign focussed on the abundance of

child sex tourism.

LAWASIA is another group of individuals that devoted many hours of their

time in assuring the new legislation was passed in Parliament. LAWASIA i

Внимание, отключите Adblock

Вы посетили наш сайт со включенным блокировщиком рекламы!
Ссылка для скачивания станет доступной сразу после отключения Adblock!

Скачать