Updates and background for this project (Digest)
CJCs COUNCIL
3.1 The CJCs Act establishes the CJCs Council and provides for its constitution, procedures and functions.
3.2 The Council had its origins in the original co-ordinating committee which was established under the pilot scheme Act.1 The membership of the co-ordinating committee emphasised the representation of interested agencies and included a member of the Police Force, persons nominated by the Council of the Law Society of New South Wales and the Ethnic Affairs Commission, as well as members of the Departments of Corrective Services, Youth and Community Services and Technical and Further Education.2 The co-ordinating committee had responsibility for setting the direction of the newly established CJCs, implementing the pilot program and appointing the first directors.3 The review of the pilot scheme in 1982 recommended that the Government request the co-ordinating committee to advise it on “future administrative, financial and policy aspects” of the program.4 The Council was seen as “retaining representation by interested organizations and responsible for the overall co-ordination of the scheme, the development of policy and the provision of advice to the Minister”.5 In recent years the CJCs Council has played less and less of an active role in the affairs of CJCs. In September 2001 the Council itself proposed its own dissolution and the establishment of a community advisory committee to advise the Director.6 The Council ceased meeting pending the outcome of this review.7 The terms of all of its members have now expired. While the reasons for the failure of the original Council are not entirely clear, one reason may be that the Act inappropriately gave the Council managerial functions while making it a forum for the representation of diverse interest groups.
Membership
3.3 The Council comprises the Director of CJCs (who is an ex officio member)8 and the following persons appointed by the Attorney General:9
- a magistrate nominated by the Chief Magistrate;
- a person nominated by the Council of Social Service of New South Wales;
- two officers of the Attorney General’s Department selected by the Attorney General; and
- not more than five persons selected “by reason of their having such special interests or experience as the [Attorney General] considers would be of assistance in the administration of [the] Act, at least one of whom is to have expertise in training”.
Functions
3.4 The Act states that the functions of the Council include the following:
(a) to determine policy guidelines for, and give directions with respect to, the operation of Community Justice Centres,
(b) to make such reports or recommendations to the Minister on any matter relating to Community Justice Centres, or on any other matter to which this Act relates, as the Council considers necessary or appropriate,
(c) to report on and make recommendations concerning the need for an evaluation under section 26 and to assist with the making of such an evaluation, and
(d) to do such supplemental, incidental and consequential acts as may be necessary or expedient for the exercise of its functions or the establishment and operation of Community Justice Centres.10
Other functions and roles are conferred throughout the Act.
3.5 Activities of the Council as identified in the Act fall into three broad categories:
- determining policy guidelines;
- giving directions; and
- giving advice.
The activities of determining policy guidelines and giving directions are closely related in the statute and give rise to a question about the Council’s role in the management of CJCs.
3.6 In addition to the general function of determining policy guidelines for, and giving directions with respect to, the operation of CJCs, the Council has some more specific functions allocated by the Act. The following actions may be taken subject to any policy guidelines or directions the Council may set:
- the recommendation by the Director that the Attorney General accredit certain people as mediators;11
- the approval by the Director of venues at which CJCs may conduct their activities;12
- the responsibility of the Director for the provision of mediation services and for the operation and management of CJCs;13 and
- the determination by the Director of the procedure for commencing and conducting a mediation session at a CJC.14
The Council may also determine that “specified classes of disputes are not to be the subject of mediation sessions, or that specified classes of disputes may be the subject of mediation sessions”.15 Also, the records of a CJC may be disposed of only in accordance with directions of the Council.16
3.7 The Council’s role in management is further emphasised in the Act by the provision which allows the Council to delegate such of its functions as it thinks fit to a member of the Council, a sub-committee of the Council or the Director of CJCs.17
3.8 The Council’s independent role is further emphasised by the provisions that allow it to make use of the “facilities, or the services of any officers, employees or other staff, of any Department of the Government or of any local or public authority or other organisation”,18 and grants exoneration from liability for anything done or omitted to be done by the Council, a sub-committee of the Council and “a member of, or a person acting under the direction of or with the authority of, the Council or any such sub-committee”.19
3.9 The Council’s role is, however, limited as the Council is stated to be subject to the “control and direction” of the Attorney General “except in relation to the contents of a report or recommendation made by it” to the Attorney General.20 The Director is stated to be “subject to the control and direction of the Council”.21 However, CJCs are also stated to “operate within and as parts of” the Attorney General’s Department.22
3.10 The reality is that the Council has not, in recent years, determined any policy guidelines nor given any directions in the areas of operation outlined above. The organisation is operated as a business centre of the Attorney General’s Department and this determines the substantive financial and policy decisions of the organisation.
Advisory role
3.11 While the role of advising the Attorney General is merely one of the general functions allocated to the Council by the Act it appears to have become a common belief that the Council existed only as a ministerial advisory body:
The reasoning behind the Council’s existence was that it would be a body of people who are independent of the direct service providers (the Department, the public servants and the mediators) and, as a representative sample of the wider community, would provide a community voice directly to the Minister.23
However, the Council has not actively performed this role on any regular basis. The Council last performed an advisory role at the time when the current CJC regions were established.
Future operation of the Council
Roles
3.12 Many submissions supported the retention of the CJCs Council in some form.24 A number of these envisaged the Council providing the Attorney General with broad advice on ADR issues25 with some expressly stating that the Council should have no role in determining CJCs practice.26 Some, however, recognised that the Council should have some role in identifying new directions that could be taken by CJCs and other government mediation service providers and in providing links between CJCs and other parts of the mediation industry.27
3.13 One submission noted that CJCs need “an objective outside body to progressively examine policy and practice issues and to consider making appropriate recommendations to the Minister taking into account available human and financial resources”.28
3.14 The Queensland Act, which also makes provision for a council, merely states that “the principal function of the council is to provide advice to the Minister on the operation of [the] Act, dispute resolution generally and the provision of mediation services under [the] Act”.29
Proposed composition
3.15 Submissions also considered the composition of the Council. Some submissions suggested that CJCs or other practising mediators must be represented30 chiefly on the grounds that they have the necessary practical experience and will ensure that the Council’s deliberations are grounded in issues that are relevant to current practice in community mediation.31 One submission raised the possibility that current CJCs mediators might participate in the Council without voting power.32 It was also suggested that consideration might be given to inviting a former experienced mediator to serve on the Council.33
3.16 One submission suggested that it is important that the membership not be fixed, “to facilitate representation of emerging communities or issues”.34 Another submission, however, emphasised that any methods of appointment ought to be statutorily prescribed.35 It was also suggested that referring agencies might be represented on the Council.36 Another submission suggested that “membership ought to include academic and practising dispute resolution professionals. They should be people who have the time, the qualifications, the willingness and generosity to make a contribution.”37
The Commission’s view
3.17 The Commission considers that there should continue to be a CJCs Council.
Role of the Council
3.18 The Commission considers that the CJCs Council should have a role in:
- developing the strategic direction of CJCs;
- endorsing policies for CJCs including standards and codes of practice;
- promoting the role of CJCs in the wider mediation community; and
- providing advice, where required, to the Director of CJCs and to the Attorney General on the operation of the CJCs Act, dispute resolution generally and the provision of mediation services.38
3.19 In expanding on the roles that may usefully be performed by the CJCs Council, consideration needs to be given to the current state of the mediation industry as a whole. It has been observed on numerous occasions that, even though debates have advanced and the industry has matured to a certain extent in recent years, the provision of mediation across the spectrum is still in its formative stages and is characterised by a significant diversity in practice.39 There is also a great diversity in opinions about standards of practice among mediators, service providers and industry and other representative bodies. The Commission has observed this particularly in its consultations and the responses it has received to Issues Paper 23.
3.20 In providing strategic and policy advice and endorsing policies there are a number of specific functions that the Council can serve. First, the Council should have a role in setting the strategic direction of CJCs, for example, determining from time to time what areas CJCs should develop or concentrate on, including whether or not strategic alliances should be formed with other bodies in the mediation industry. The Council could identify emerging trends in mediation and help to articulate objectives for CJCs so that they could have a mandate for taking new approaches in the field of mediation. The Council could also advise on the role CJCs should play in the development of national standards for mediators as it is important for the government/community sector to have a say in this process.
3.21 Secondly, the Council should have a role in the determination of policies. For example, what disputes should be mediated by CJCs and under what circumstances.
3.22 Thirdly, the Council should be a forum for the provision of expert advice on the practice of mediation to assist the Director of CJCs with the Director’s management responsibilities in providing mediation services to the community of New South Wales. Such advice will be particularly valuable in relation to questions of policy and practice that are developing and/or contentious and will help ensure a thorough examination of all relevant issues.
3.23 Some specific matters that the Council could assist in developing policies and provide advice on are discussed, where relevant, in the course of this Report, including:
- the adequacy of the geographic distribution of CJCs’ services;40
- the charging of institutions for use of CJCs’ services;41
- the periodic review of the provisions setting forth what matters need to be considered before a dispute is accepted for mediation at CJCs;42
- CJCs’ approach to mandatory mediations;43
- competencies for pre-mediators;44
- pre-mediation at CJCs;45
- the exercise of the Director’s discretion to allow agents or representatives to take part in a mediation;46
- codes of practice,47 including those that deal with disputes where violence is present;48
- handling complaints about CJCs mediators and the CJCs mediation process;49
- the content of training programs;50 and
- appropriate venues for some mediations.51
3.24 Finally, the Council should be able to address problems of isolation of CJCs from the wider industry and help to prevent the drift in standards that may arise from lack of input from or interaction with parts of the industry outside CJCs.
3.25 In discharging its functions, the Council may, of course, act proactively but, in practice, the Commission envisages that the Council will act in response to proposals from the management of CJCs, including initiatives from the CJCs’ internal reference groups.52
3.26 The Council should be appropriately resourced. Members of the Council should also be appropriately paid.
Composition
3.27 The technical and academic expertise and standing required for the changed role of the Council necessitates a change in its composition. In order to ensure that the Council performs effectively the Commission also considers that only those with demonstrated ability and interest in the policy and practice of mediation should be appointed and that the size of the Council should be kept to a minimum. The Commission also considers that the newly reformed Council should not become a forum for representatives of interest groups, referring organisations or internal groupings within CJCs. This function is more appropriately carried out by internal and external reference groups which may be convened from time to time. Accordingly the Commission recommends that the Council should consist of:
- three practising mediators;
- a magistrate;
- two academics; and
- the Director of CJCs.
All but the Director, whose position will be ex-officio, should be appointed by the Attorney General.
3.28 One of the three practising mediators should hold a current accreditation with CJCs and the other two, whether they are accredited with CJCs or not, should currently be undertaking mediation work with other mediation service providers in New South Wales. In appointing the two other mediators, it is expected that the Attorney General will consult with relevant peak bodies and service providers such as LEADR, the Australian Commercial Disputes Centre, the Institute of Arbitrators and Mediators Australia and Relationships Australia. The organisations that the Attorney General should consult will change from time to time as the mediation industry continues to develop.
3.29 The presence of three practicing mediators will ensure that the advice that the Council offers will be grounded in practical considerations. This will also give the Council credibility in the eyes of the CJCs mediators. The presence of mediators who are currently working with other mediation service providers will ensure that a wider view is taken of the issues facing the mediation industry from a practical perspective.
3.30 The Magistrate should be chosen by the Attorney General in consultation with the Chief Magistrate. A Magistrate has been proposed because the Local Courts are the jurisdiction most closely connected with the work of CJCs.
3.31 The two academic appointments must have a track record of interest in Alternative Dispute Resolution. The presence of two academics will help keep CJCs abreast of developments in the field from a critical perspective. Astor and Chinkin have suggested:
It is an appropriate role of legal scholars to ask questions about legal institutions. Nor will these questions always be comfortable ones. However, responding to and dealing with the challenges of critical and evaluative scholarship will ultimately strengthen the theory and practice of ADR. A healthy relationship between scholars and practitioners is highly desirable for the strong future development of ADR and needs to be pursued with vigour on both sides.53
3.32 The Director, as an ex-officio member of the Council, will be able to inform the Council on the day-to-day operation of CJCs and the wider policy issues to which that gives rise and generally be the link between the Council and the management of CJCs, including the reference groups.
3.33 It is envisaged that the Attorney General, in making appointments to the Council, will consider the desirability of appointing Indigenous people as members of the Council. Such appointments may contribute to the CJCs’ task of developing services that will meet the needs of the Indigenous communities of New South Wales.54 In making this recommendation the Commission acknowledges the shortcomings of appointing Indigenous members to what will be a predominantly non-Indigenous body, that is, Indigenous members cannot represent the diversity of Aboriginal communities in New South Wales and Indigenous members will almost always be in the minority and may become distanced from their own constituency because of their (minority) involvement in a mainstream body.55 However, such appointments will go some way to ensuring that Indigenous needs and concerns are appropriately dealt with by the Council.
3.34 The chairperson should be appointed by the Attorney General from among those appointed to the Council. The Attorney General in selecting the chairperson should choose someone with:
Consequential amendments
3.35 More than 20 years after the establishment of CJCs, it is now no longer appropriate that the Council issue directions or make determinations concerning the day-to-day operation of CJCs. These functions are now appropriately performed by the Director. All references to the Council issuing directions, or controlling the management of CJCs should, therefore, be removed from the CJCs Act.56
RECOMMENDATION 5
Section 10(2), s 11(1), s 16(2), s 20(1) and s 21(1) of the CJCs Act should be amended to remove the power of the Council to make determinations or issue directions to the management of CJCs.
3.36 Some other provisions relating to the Council should be amended or removed from the CJCs Act as being now irrelevant to the operation of CJCs and the Council. These provisions are:
- the provision allowing the Council to make arrangements with other government departments and authorities concerning the use of facilities and staff;57
- the provisions allowing the Council to establish sub-committees;58 and
- the provision requiring the Council to prepare the annual report of CJCs.59
The Commission is of the view that the first listed provision ought to be repealed; the second listed provision ought also to be repealed as it confuses the roles of the Council and the Director; and the provision requiring the Council to prepare the annual report ought merely to require the Council to endorse the annual report.
RECOMMENDATION 6
a) Section 8 of the CJCs Act should be repealed.
b) Section 9 of the CJCs Act should be repealed.
c) Section 31(1) of the CJCs Act should be amended so that the Council shall endorse, rather than prepare, the CJCs annual report.
MANAGEMENT
3.37 CJCs are managed by the Director of CJCs and are administered in four regions - the northern, southern, western and Sydney regions.60 Each region has a Regional Co-ordinator who reports to the Director.
The Director
3.38 The Director is responsible for the day-to-day operation of CJCs. When CJCs were first established there was one Director for each of the three Centres.61 In 1983 it became possible to have one person as a Director of multiple Centres. In 1992, amendments were passed to reflect the reality that there was in fact one Director for all CJCs.62 The Director is appointed in accordance with Part 2 of the Public Sector Management Act 1988 (NSW).63
3.39 The Act provides that the Director is, “in the exercise of his or her functions, subject to the control and direction of the Council”.64 This does not reflect the reality that CJCs are part of the departmental structure of the Attorney General’s Department and, as such, the Director of CJCs reports directly to the Assistant Director-General and the Director-General of the Department.65 However, the Act also provides that CJCs “operate within and as parts of” the Attorney General’s Department.66 The question of the role of the Council vis-a-vis the Director in the exercise of his or her functions has been dealt with above.67
3.40 The Act allocates numerous functions to the Director of CJCs. The Director is responsible for:
- “the provision of mediation services and for the operation and management of Community Justice Centres”;68
- assigning mediators to conduct each mediation session;69
- ensuring that certain records relating to the activities of CJCs are retained;70 and
- consenting to the acceptance of disputes for mediation.71
3.41 The Director may also:72
- recommend that the Attorney General accredit a person as a mediator;73
- approve places at which the activities of CJCs may be conducted;74
- determine the procedure for commencing and conducting a mediation session;75
- decline to accept a dispute for mediation;76
- terminate a mediation at any time;77 and
- approve the representation by an agent of a party to a mediation;78
3.42 The powers and responsibilities of the Director may be delegated to any member of staff of CJCs.79
Reference Groups
3.43 CJCs make use of two reference groups which were formed in 2001/2002:
- Professional Reference Group which comprises managers, staff and mediators and has the aim of looking at “quality issues regarding the theory and practice of alternative dispute resolution”;80
- Training Group which comprises managers and mediators and was formed “to provide trainers to conduct the statewide training program”.81
CJCs have also established an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Network.82 This is discussed in Chapter 9.83
3.44 These groups have no legislative base and their members are recruited from within the organisation. Their main function is to provide internal forums for dealing with practical matters relating to the operation of CJCs. While they perform this function well, they are not intended to cover the policy advice and standard setting roles of the CJCs Council.
Professional reference group
3.45 The Professional Reference Group’s functions are governed by a charter which states that the Group is subject to the direction of the Director of CJCs “in consultation with the CJCs management team”.84
3.46 The Professional Reference Group’s charter states that its purpose is:
to provide support and advice to the CJCs to ensure a mediation and conflict management service to regional New South Wales which conforms with best practice principles and which is the recognised industry leader in mediation and related conflict management process.85
To achieve this, the Group will aim to strengthen links between the management of the CJCs, mediators, staff and the community, develop links with other dispute resolution providers, research mediation and conflict management practices and develop frameworks and principles for the provision of mediation and conflict management services.86
3.47 The Group’s Charter further states that its members shall do the following with respect to mediation and conflict management theory and practice:
* ensure best practice standards are met
* inform CJC mediators and staff about current issues
* respond to requests for advice from staff and mediators
* identify training opportunities and advise the Training Group
* conduct and/or [oversee] research
* write and present papers for conferences, seminars, etc
* write papers to be published in industry journals
* assist the Director and the Business Development and Training Manager as required. 87
Some of these functions could usefully inform the work of the CJCs Council.88
3.48 Provision is currently made for 21 members to be appointed to the Professional Reference Group. Three officers of the CJCs are ex-officio, namely the Director, the Business Development and Training Manager and the Executive Officer. The following are appointed by endorsement by their peers:
- two CJCs Co-ordinators;
- two CJCs interviewing officers;
- one member of the CJCs Directorate’s administrative staff;
- one Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander CJCs mediator; and
- one representative of the CJCs Training Group.
3.49 Eight mediators (not being CJCs employees) are selected on application, two from each CJCs region. Three mediator specialists are selected by invitation of the Director of CJCs. Members of the Group who do not receive a salary are paid the current hourly rate for mediation for their attendance. Travel and accommodation expenses are also met where necessary.89
Training group
3.50 The Training Group is an informal group that currently consists of about 20 people including the CJCs Business Development and Training Manager, the Regional Co-ordinators and accredited mediators who have completed “train the trainer training”.90
3.51 Objectives of the Training Group include:
- participation in writing, designing, identifying and evaluating courses;
- offering best practice training in order to provide consistency and uniformity across the State; and
- meeting accreditation and re-accreditation requirements.91
3.52 Mediators from the Training Group are now conducting the CJC’s training program.92
The Commission’s view
3.53 The Commission considers that the Professional Reference Group and Training Group both perform useful functions within the current management structure of CJCs. The Commission encourages the continued use of these and other internal reference groups to assist in the day-to-day operation of CJCs.
FOOTNOTES
1. Community Justice Centres (Pilot Project) Act 1980 (NSW).
2. Community Justice Centres (Pilot Project) Act 1980 (NSW) Sch 1 cl 1(2).
3. J Schwartzkoff and J Morgan, Community Justice Centres: A Report on the New South Wales Pilot Project, 1979-81 (Law Foundation of New South Wales, 1982) at 7-8.
4. J Schwartzkoff and J Morgan, Community Justice Centres: A Report on the New South Wales Pilot Project, 1979-81 (Law Foundation of New South Wales, 1982) at 198.
5. NSW, Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) Legislative Assembly, 19 October 1983 at 1881.
6. CJCs Council, “Report to Legislation and Policy review of the Community Justice Centres Act 1983” (2001) at 1.
7. CJCs, Annual Report 2003-2004 at 2.
8. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) Sch 1 cl 1(3).
9. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) Sch 1 cl 1(2).
10. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 6(1).
11. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 11(1).
12. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 16(2).
13. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 20(1).
14. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 21(1).
15. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 22(1).
16. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 17(3).
17. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 9(1). Provisions for delegation of functions to the Director would not be necessary if the Council were only intended to perform an advisory function.
18. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 8.
19. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 27(1)(a) and (b).
20. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 7.
21. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 10.
22. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 18.
23. CJCs, Annual Report 2001-2002 at 13.
24. C Courcier-Jones, Submission at 4; Confidential 2, Submission at 3; CJCs, Professional Reference Group, Submission at 12; Confidential 4, Submission 1 at 2-3; Law Society of NSW, Submission at 11.
25. C Courcier-Jones, Submission at 4; Confidential 2, Submission at 3; CJCs, Submission 1 at 18.
26. CJCs, Professional Reference Group, Submission at 12.
27. C Courcier-Jones, Submission at 4; CJCs, Professional Reference Group, Submission at 12.
28. Law Society of NSW, Submission at 11.
29. Dispute Resolution Centres Act 1990 (Qld) s 3(2).
30. C Courcier-Jones, Submission at 4; Law Society of NSW, Submission at 11; Confidential 2, Submission at 3; Confidential 4, Submission 1 at 2.
31. Law Society of NSW, Submission at 11; C Courcier-Jones, Submission at 4.
32. Law Society of NSW, Submission at 11.
33. Law Society of NSW, Submission at 11.
34. CJCs, Professional Reference Group, Submission at 12.
35. Confidential 4, Submission 1 at 2
36. Department of Community Services, Submission at 2.
37. Confidential 4, Submission 1 at 2.
38. Compare these functions with those of the Privacy Advisory Committee: Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (NSW) s 61.
39. T Sourdin, Alternative Dispute Resolution (Lawbook Co, Sydney, 2002) at 16; H Astor and C Chinkin, Dispute Resolution in Australia (2nd edition, LexisNexis Butterworths, Australia, 2002) at 203; NSWLRC, Training and Accreditation of Mediators (Report 67, 1991).
40. See para 1.37-1.39.
41. See para 1.40-1.47.
42. See para 4.71-4.72; Recommendation 7.
43. See para 5.24.
44. See para 5.45-5.47; Recommendation 8.
45. See para 5.49.
46. See para 5.53-5.63.
47. See para 7.17-7.46.
48. See para 4.72-4.74.
49. See para 7.79-7.93.
50. See para 8.48-8.54.
51. See para 10.4-10.12.
52. See para 3.43-3.53.
53. H Astor and C Chinkin, Dispute Resolution in Australia (2nd edition, LexisNexis Butterworths, Australia, 2002) at 25.
54. See J Delaney, Submission.
55. Redfern Community Centre, Consultation.
56. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 10(2), s 11(1), s 16(2), s 20(1), s 21(1).
57. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 8.
58. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 9(1).
59. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 31(1).
60. See CJCs, Annual Report 2001-2002 at 8.
61. Community Justice Centres (Pilot Project) Act 1980 (NSW) s 9. See also NSW, Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) Legislative Assembly, 19 October 1983 at 1881.
62. Statute Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act (No 3) 1992 (NSW) Sch 1.
63. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 12(1).
64. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 10(2).
65. CJCs, Preliminary Submission at 3.
66. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 18.
67. See para 3.6, 3.9, 3.22, 3.32, 3.35.
68. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 20(1).
69. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 20(2).
70. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 17(1).
71. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 20(3).
72. Many of these functions are exercised by the Director, subject to the determinations and directions of the Council. See para 3.6 above.
73. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 11(1).
74. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 16(2).
75. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 21(1).
76. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 24(1).
77. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 24(2).
78. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 25.
79. Community Justice Centres Act 1983 (NSW) s 13.
80. CJCs, Annual Report 2001-2002 at 4.
81. CJCs, Annual Report 2001-2002 at 4.
82. See CJCs, Annual Report 2001-2002 at 9.
83. Para 9.10-9.11.
84. CJCs, Professional Reference Group Charter.
85. CJCs, Professional Reference Group Charter. See also CJCs Profession Reference Group, Preliminary Submission at 1; CJCs, Annual Report 2001-2002 at 8.
86. CJCs, Professional Reference Group Charter.
87. CJCs, Professional Reference Group Charter.
88. See para 3.18-3.26, above.
89. CJCs, Professional Reference Group Charter.
90. Information supplied by D Sharp, Director, CJCs (29 August 2003).
91. CJCs Training Group, Minutes of Meeting (3 June 2002).
92. CJCs, Annual Report 2001-2002 at 9.
