Explanatory Statement Justice Legislation Amendment Bill 2015 (Serial 119)
Tabled paper 1282
Tabled Papers for 12th Assembly 2012 - 2016; Tabled Papers; ParliamentNT
Tabled by Johan Elferink
Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory under Standing Order 240. Where copyright subsists with a third party it remains with the original owner and permission may be required to reuse the material.
4 Clause 9. Section 26 amended Clause 9 of the Bill amends section 26 of the Anti-Discrimination Act, to extend protection to a tribunal when it requires information from a person; which might otherwise be information on which unlawful discrimination might be based. Clause 10. Section 62 amended Clause 10 of the Bill amends section 62 of the Anti-Discrimination Act, which provides for authorisations to act for a complainant or respondent. Section 62(2A) is being inserted to broaden the discretion of the Commissioner in authorising a person to act for a complainant or respondent and allow the Commissioner to set conditions. An example of the kind of person the Commissioner may authorise to act on behalf of the complainant or respondent is inserted following section 62(3), which includes a lawyer, guardian, friend or family member to act on behalf of the complainant or respondent or accompany and assist the complainant or respondent in any proceedings under the Act. Clause 11. Section 65 amended Clause 11 of this Bill amends section 65 of the Anti-Discrimination Act which provides for the time limit for the making of a complaint. Section 65(1) is amended to omit 6 months and replace the time limit with 12 months. The replacement of 6 months with 12 months will increase the time allowed for complaints to be made to the Commissioner to 12 months after the alleged prohibited conduct took place. Clause 12. Section 66 amended Section 66 of the Anti-Discrimination Act provides that the Commissioner must accept or reject a complaint received. Clause 12 of this Bill amends the heading and body of section 66 by omitting the word reject and replacing that word with decline. The use of the word decline reduces perceived severity by complainants in comparison with the word reject.