Skip to main content
Article
Pre-emptive imprisonment for dangerousness in Queensland under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003: The Constitutional issues
Psychiatry, Psychology and Law (2004)
  • Patrick Keyzer, University of Technology, Sydney
  • Cathy Pereira
  • Stephen Southwood
Abstract
Unlike any other law in Australia, or as far as we have been able to research the common law world, Queensland law now authorises a court to imprison a citizen on the basis that he or she presents an 'unacceptable risk to the community'. This is not done as part of the sentencing process, but as a consequence of a procedure tacked onto the end of a person's sentence that bears no real relationship to a criminal trial. The imprisonment of a citizen, not for what they have done but for what they might do, represents a radical departure from traditional judicial functions. We contend that Queensland law significantly undermines the safeguards provided by traditional judicial processes, inflicting double punishment, and that this is unconstitutional. This article outlines the constitutional arguments presented to the High Court of Australia by the Appellant in Fardon v Attorney-General (Queensland), an appeal to the Full Court of the High Court of Australia that was heard in Canberra on March 2, 2004. The appeal was dismissed on October 4, 2004.
Keywords
  • preventive detention,
  • Queensland,
  • double punishment,
  • Fardon v Attorney-General (Queensland)
Disciplines
Publication Date
January 1, 2004
Publisher Statement
Access the journal

Access the article via the DOI

Citation Information
Patrick Keyzer, Cathy Pereira and Stephen Southwood. "Pre-emptive imprisonment for dangerousness in Queensland under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003: The Constitutional issues" Psychiatry, Psychology and Law Vol. 11 Iss. 2 (2004)
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/patrick_keyzer/3/