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.
|
