Territory Stories

Completed audit of parolees and community based offenders on electronic monitoring

Details:

Title

Completed audit of parolees and community based offenders on electronic monitoring

Member

Fyles, Natasha Kate

Political affiliation

Australian Labor Party

Collection

Media Releases for 13th Assembly 2016 - 2020; Media Releases; ParliamentNT

Date

2019-06-25

Notes

Made available via the Publications (Legal Deposit) Act 2004 (NT).

Language

English

Subject

Prisoners; Sentencing; Electronic surveillance

Publisher name

Northern Territory Government

File type

application/pdf

Use

Issued as a Media Release

Copyright owner

Northern Territory Government

Parent handle

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/752196

Citation address

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/753580

Related items

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/753579

Page content

Electronic Monitoring Audit Page 21 of 30 Drugs The audit identified that random drug testing was required on 112 of the 196 offenders: 94 offenders (84%) were drug tested in accordance with the requirements in the OMF. 18 offenders were not tested with sufficient frequency to meet the requirements of the OMF. 84 offenders did not require drug testing. Of the 18 offenders on electronic monitoring where the OMF standards were not met for drug testing: 2 offenders live or work in a remote region. 1 offender has been in rehabilitation for the majority of the supervision period. 1 offender had been non-compliant and Community Corrections was unable to contact him for a period of time. He was subsequently breached and is now compliant with his order. 12 offenders have had some drug testing but not consistently to the required standard. Most of these offenders are supervised by offices that have experienced staffing pressures. 2 offenders have not had any random drug testing. Both offenders are subject to testing only as a result of their order conditions and not because it relates to their offending. Alcohol The audit identified that random alcohol testing was required on 127 of the 196 offenders: 105 offenders (83%) were breath tested in accordance with the requirements of the OMF. 22 offenders were not breath tested with sufficient frequency to meet the requirements of the OMF. 69 offenders did not require breath testing. Of the 22 offenders where it was identified that the OMF standards were not met for alcohol testing: 2 offenders live or work in a remote region. 7 offenders have been in residential rehabilitation for the majority of their supervision. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Drug Testing Alcohol Testing 84 69 18 22 94 105 Electronic Monitoring - Drug and Alcohol Testing N/A Less Frequently than Required Yes