Domestic violence advocates raise concerns over expansion of police powers

New legislation in Queensland would grant police the authority to issue three-year protection orders on-the-spot, expanding upon the current 12-month directive. This proposal has raised concerns among domestic and family violence advocates, who question whether these changes prioritize police efficiency over the safety of victims. A public hearing on the bill will be held in Brisbane next week, with similar hearings set for other cities later in the month.

The proposed law would allow police to issue a three-year on-the-spot protection directive, a significant increase from the current 12-month timeframe. This expansion would also establish new offences for violating such directives, with the maximum penalty raised to five years. The Queensland Police Union supports the changes, claiming they will enable quicker protection for victims and reduce administrative burdens on officers.

However, advocates remain skeptical, expressing concerns that the police's efficiency gains are prioritized over the safety and well-being of those affected by domestic violence.

The Queensland Domestic and Family Violence Alliance's executive director, Melanie Arnost, expressed reservations about the potential effectiveness of police-issued protection orders. She emphasized that advocates are concerned about untested assumptions regarding the efficiency of these measures, asserting that the safety of victims should be evaluated before any expansion is implemented.

The Queensland Law Society and the North Queensland Women's Service have also voiced concerns, arguing that a mandatory judicial review should be required for three-year police directives, particularly in high-risk and complex cases.

Critics argue that the effectiveness of these orders may be questionable, as high-risk and complex matters are often not identified at the initial incident but only during subsequent appointments with a specialist domestic violence duty lawyer or support worker. Additionally, there are concerns that those subject to restrictive conditions may not be aware of their right to seek a court review or possess the necessary resources, knowledge, or capacity to do so.

Support services have also expressed worry that redirecting domestic and family violence work to police rather than specialist courts could result in victim-survivors being overlooked or not receiving essential support.

The Queensland Police Union has called for amendments to the bill to ensure that officers who exercise their powers in good faith are not held personally liable for their decisions. Minister Dan Purdie responded, stating that the government's aim is to protect victims of domestic and family violence more promptly and hold perpetrators accountable through these reforms.

The legislation also seeks to expand electronic monitoring for high-risk domestic violence offenders and modify court processes related to cross-examination of victim-survivors and the handling of sensitive material in domestic and family violence proceedings.