Bills Digest no. 56 1976
Foreign Proceedings (Prohibition Of Certain Evidence)
Bill 1976
WARNING:
This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as
introduced and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest
does not have any official legal status. Other sources should be
consulted to determine the subsequent official status of the
Bill.
CONTENTS
Passage History
Purpose
Summary
Background
Contact Officer & Copyright Details
Passage History
Foreign Proceedings (Prohibition Of
Certain Evidence) Bill 1976
Date introduced: 18 November
1976
House: House of Representatives
Purpose
This measure (which has already been
passed by both Houses of the Parliament) enables the
Attorney-General to prohibit the giving of evidence or the
production of documents to foreign tribunals.
Summary
Clause 5 of the Bill empowers the
Attorney-General to make orders prohibiting the production whether
directly or indirectly of documents which are in Australia to
foreign tribunals or prohibiting the giving of evidence about such
documents to such tribunals directly or indirectly.
Orders may be made in relation to a
particular foreign tribunal, a class of foreign tribunals or all
foreign tribunals; they may be made in relation to a particular
document or to a class or documents; and they may be directed to a
particular person, a class of persons or to persons generally.
Restrictions are placed on the
Attorneys-General s powers by clause 4. These restrictions,
however, are not enforceable in the courts (sub-clause 4 (2)). The
Attorney-General is only to exercise his powers where this is
desirable to protect the national interest or where a foreign
tribunal is exercising powers not consistent with international law
or comity.
Clause 6 of the Bill provides for
service of orders made by the Attorney-General and clause 7 makes
it an offence punishable by a fine of $5,000 or 6 months
imprisonment (in the case of an individual) or a fine of $10,000
(in the case of a company) to contravene an order.
Background
Although this legislation has been
prompted by various proceedings in the United States in relation to
that country s anti-trust laws, it is not limited to those
proceedings or that country.
Law and Government Group
29 November 1976
Bills Digest Service
Information and Research Services
This paper has been prepared to support the work of the
Australian Parliament using information available at the time of
production. The views expressed do not reflect an official position
of the Information and Research Service, nor do they constitute
professional legal opinion.
IRS staff are available to discuss the paper's
contents with Senators and Members and their staff but not with
members of the public.
ISSN 1328-8091
© Commonwealth of Australia 2006
Except to the extent of the uses permitted under the
Copyright Act 1968, no part of this publication may be
reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, including
information storage and retrieval systems, without the prior
written consent of the Parliamentary Library, other than by members
of the Australian Parliament in the course of their official
duties.
Published by the Parliamentary Library, 2006.
Back to top