Varying community safety orders after review
395.26 Varying community safety orders after review
Varying the period specified by a community safety order
A Supreme Court of a State or Territory must vary a community safety order in relation to a serious offender to specify a shorter period for which the order will be in force if:
the Court affirms the order under subsection 395.25(6); and
the Court is not satisfied that the period currently specified is reasonably necessary to protect the community from serious harm by addressing the unacceptable risk of the offender committing a serious violent or sexual offence.
The shorter period must be a period that the Court is satisfied is reasonably necessary to address the unacceptable risk.
See section 395.22 for the terms of a varied community safety supervision order.
Varying or removing conditions
A Supreme Court of a State or Territory must vary, or remove, a condition imposed by a community safety supervision order if:
the Court affirms the order under subsection 395.25(6); and
the Court is not satisfied that the condition is reasonably necessary, and reasonably appropriate and adapted, for the purpose of protecting the community from serious harm by addressing the unacceptable risk of the offender committing a serious violent or sexual offence.
The Court must be satisfied that a condition that is varied under subsection (2) is (after the variation) reasonably necessary, and reasonably appropriate and adapted, for the purpose of protecting the community from serious harm by addressing the unacceptable risk of the offender committing a serious violent or sexual offence.
Varying to add conditions
The Court may vary a community safety supervision order to add one or more conditions if the Court is satisfied that the conditions are reasonably necessary, and reasonably appropriate and adapted, for the purpose of protecting the community from serious harm by addressing the unacceptable risk of the offender committing a serious violent or sexual offence.
Object of this Division
For the purposes of subsections (3) and (4), in determining whether a condition to be varied or imposed on the offender by the order is reasonably necessary, and reasonably appropriate and adapted, the Court must take into account, as a paramount consideration in all cases, the object of this Division (see section 395.1).
Onus of satisfying Court
The Immigration Minister bears the onus of satisfying the Court of the matters referred to in subsection (1), (3) or (4).
The statute text is free to read above. View subscription options to unlock the case-law research tools for each provision.