Share
However, a 2017 amendment to the Corrective Services Act 2006 (Qld), and similarly an amendment in 2018 to the Bail Act 1980 (Qld), provided corrective services and the courts the opportunity to consider GPS monitoring for parolees and defendants on bail, respectively. These changes came off the back of the 2015 Department of Justice Special Taskforce that produced the Not Now, Not Ever: Putting an End to Domestic Violence in Queensland report.1
Since the report, extensive research has been conducted on the effectiveness of GPS monitoring in the Domestic and Family Violence (DFV) context with concerns centring on the potential for victims to assume an unrealistic expectation of safety, and for the possibility of sole reliance on the technology by both the courts and victims. An evaluation report by the QPS,2 has indicated that GPS Monitoring should be used as part of case management, rather than a standalone solution to the mitigation of risk. Evidence relied upon shows this technology has the capacity to reduce the risk of harm, recidivism and incarceration rates.3
Potential issues with the measure have been identified, one being that whilst GPS Monitoring has shown to reduce the number of breaches, it fails to reduce the ultimate risk of harm. Police response times can vary dependant on resourcing within both urban and regional areas. The idea that authorities are providing ‘real time response’ for breaches is not accurate nor possible, but rather should be described as ‘real time monitoring’. Therefore, whilst a breach is able to be recorded, there is a limitation as to the real ability in the prevention of actual physical harm.
Additionally, when applying this method of monitoring, the courts are required to consider the rights and freedoms of a defendant on bail, and the restriction of movement by respondents that are subject to civil domestic violence protection orders. Low-risk offenders may also be caught up in the widening of the use of GPS
Monitoring, exposing them to stigmatisation associated with the wearing of a device, along with restriction of movement.
Finally, whilst recidivism and an increased sense of safety by victims are outcomes of GPS Monitoring, the scheme needs to be accompanied by a framework of solutions that incorporate a complete set of components that have the ability to address the complicated nature of DFV offending. 4 This, paired with consideration of risk assessment of offenders, will allow for the application of this technology to be reasonably and fairly ordered by corrective services and the courts.
https://www.justice.qld.gov.au/initiatives/end-domestic-family-violence/about/not-now-not-ever-report
State of Queensland (Queensland Police Service), (2019) ‘The Domestic and Family Violence GPS-enabled Electronic Monitoring Technology. Evaluation Report’lice Service), (2019) ‘The Domestic and Family Violence GPS-
State of Queensland (Queensland Police Service), (2019) ‘The Domestic and Family Violence GPS-
enabled Electronic Monitoring Technology. Evaluation Report’.
enabled Electronic Monitoring Technology. Evaluation Report’.
Athea Hucklesby and Ella Holdsworth, (2016) ‘Electronic monitoring in England and Wales’, Centre for Criminal Justice Studies, University of Leeds, United Kingdom.
Mark - Google Review
© Fisher Dore Lawyers
Site by POMO
Liability limited by a scheme approved under professional standards legislation | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Site Links
Once you submit this form you will be contacted by one of our lawyers who are trained to deal with legal situations just like yours. You will be treated with respect and without judgement.
Everything you put in this form is secure and confidential.
CALL US 24/7 ON 1300 557 884
CALL US 24/7 ON 1300 557 884
MAIL@FISHERDORE.COM.AU