Crimes Amendment (Zoe's Law) Bill (No. 2) 2013: Passes Lower House
Friday 22 November 2013 @ 11.27 a.m. | Crime | Legal Research
The controversial legislation known as the Crimes Amendment (Zoe's Law) Bill (No. 2) 2013 has passed through the Parliament of New South Wales (NSW) lower house in a conscience vote by a majority of 63 to 26 votes. The proposed legislation that purports to recognise an unborn child in criminal law has passed through the NSW Legislative Assembly despite, as today's press is reporting: "the protests of legal bodies and women's groups that it will endanger women's reproductive rights".
Background
As noted in previous posts, the Bill was introduced into Parliament by State Liberal Chris Spence and has become known as Zoe's law after the stillborn child of NSW mother Brodie Donegan, who was struck by a car in 2009, suffering injuries that resulted in the loss of her 32-week-old foetus and the driver of the vehicle not being charged with Zoe's death because the law does not recognise the stillborn child as a person. The Bill would amend the Crimes Act 1900 NSW to provide that a separate offence exists for conduct causing serious harm to or the destruction of a child in utero but excluding medical procedures or conduct engaged in with the consent of the mother.
Reaction
NSW Premier Barry O’Farrell is quoted in today's press as saying he would support the Bill as long as "an amendment was passed which attempts to make it clear that the law will not affect women’s access to abortion, make a mother liable for harm to her unborn child, or make illegal that which is now legal" and that amendment was passed by the lower house.
Interestingly, it appears a majority of female Ministers in the Parliament voted against the Bill in the Assembly as the Sydney Morning Herald reports the Health Minister Jillian Skinner, the Transport Minister Gladys Berejiklian, the Environment Minister Robyn Parker and the Minister for Women, Pru Goward all voted against the Bill.
One of the key reasons given for voting against the Bill by members of parliament from both sides who voted against it, is that "its definition of a foetus at 20 weeks, or 400 grams, as an unborn child, taken to be a separate living person, was arbitrary" and according to one Liberal the member for Hornsby Matt Kean it would "open the door to unintended consequences".
Others against the Bill also argued the current laws adequately address and deal with criminal incidents involving the death of an unborn child. Those of this view pointing out that: "[I]ntentionally causing grievous bodily harm carries a penalty of up to 25 years, and recklessly doing the same carries a maximum penalty of 14 years . . . If the mother of the child is injured, and the foetus is destroyed, both harms can be taken into consideration as aggravating factors, as outlined in section 21A(g) Crimes (Sentencing and Procedure) Act."
The NSW Law Society is reported to have criticised the law as "unnecessary", taking the view that it will lead to unjust sentencing and that its definition of an "unborn child" is likely to spill into murder and manslaughter cases causing confusion.
Women's groups have in the main voiced their fear that the legislation will interfere with a woman's right to have an abortion and continue to oppose the proposed law.
Next for the legislation
The next step for the Bill is for it to be presented in the NSW Legislative Council, where it is expected a closer vote will result, as well as an interesting debate given the presence of the Reverend Nile and his well known views on these matters.
TimeBase is an independent, privately owned Australian legal publisher specialising in the online delivery of accurate, comprehensive and innovative legislation research tools including LawOne and unique Point-in-Time Products.
