George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Hansard source

I think the problem with that answer, if I may say so, with respect, is that, although as you said before the strict liability merely applies to proposed subsection 2(c) so that the prosecution is relieved of the obligation to prove the person is not a victim of a forced marriage, it does not apply to subsection 2(a) or 2(b), which does require the prosecution to prove the character of the other party to the marriage and that the marriage was a forced marriage. In other words, to prove that which subsection 1, the principal offence-creating provision, establishes as the elements of the offence.

So those who think that some burden has been lifted from the prosecution's shoulders by creating, as it were, a statutory presumption in relation to the one issue in subsection (2)(c), really, with respect to them, missed the point, because that issue is nevertheless—albeit from a different aspect of the case—still before the court. It still has to be proved by the prosecution and it has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.