Cross-border justice: for legal professionals

Community corrections agreement

Cross-border corrections committee

The cross-border community corrections committee was established as part of the agreement, and comprises regional managers from the three jurisdictions. It meets as required to monitor and coordinate the operation of community corrections cross-border services. 

Participating jurisdictions agree to report to the committee on the number of offenders being supervised under different categories of supervision orders and to raise any issues for consideration and resolution.

Central to the service level agreement is the appointment of authorised officers by each of the community correction agencies. These officers are, where practicable, authorised to provide assistance to cross-border courts and provide assessment, monitoring and supervision of interstate offenders and defendants.

Parts 6 to 14 of the agreement

Part 6.2 says that the cross-border legislation authorises community corrections officers in each jurisdiction to supervise and generally deal with interstate offenders and defendants from anywhere within the cross-border region.

Part 7 says that it is not the intention of the agreement that the authorised officers will provide services to those courts outside of their jurisdiction.

Part 8 says the authorising officers are to be supervised and disciplined under the existing management structure. 

Part 9 says that where practicable, the officers are to attend sittings of cross-border magistrates in their jurisdiction.

Parts 10 and 11 refer to information management including records management and the exchange of information that has to be in compliance with the law and cross-border legislation. It is agreed that staff in the region are to maintain regular contact and share information on current activities, issues and opportunities for collaboration.

Part 12 says that when an offender is being supervised in a participating jurisdiction, the authorising officers are responsible for ensuring that the home state is informed of the supervised offender's progress.

Part 13 covers circumstances that result in the supervision of interstate orders. These include where an offender:

  • is sentenced by a cross-border magistrate for an interstate offence
  • is on an order that she or he normally reside or should reside in another jurisdiction
  • moves to another state
  • is released from prison or police custody and will be living in another jurisdiction
  • is a defendant who is being released on bail conditions that require supervision.

The supervising agency must provide rehabilitation services in accordance with the standard practice and policy of the home agency, but subject to the availability and practicality of providing such services.

Part 14 covers pre-sentence assessments and reports and agrees that community residence is to be decided administratively. The assessment is to consider community residence that will offer the most support and best prospects for the offender completing the order. Factors that are listed for consideration for community of residence include:

  • the location and the views of victims
  • a person's normal place of residence
  • access to any treatment
  • preference of family or community elders
  • access to family and/or support people, and expressed preference of offenders.

The community corrections agency in the jurisdiction where the cross-border magistrate sits is to meet all reasonable costs to facilitate the above.

Parts 15 to 24 of the agreement

Part 15 says that wherever possible, officers are to attend court hearings of breaches of supervised orders before cross-border magistrates. With the variation or breach of supervision orders the supervising state is responsible for initiating both. But in terms of prosecuting the breach of an order, the supervising state collaborates with and supports the home state.

Part 16 covers the circumstances for the supervision of parole and re-entry released orders in Western Australia and includes sentencing by a cross-border magistrate, being released under such orders, and living in one of the participating jurisdictions or where she/he moves to another participating jurisdiction. The overall management is specified to be the home state agency but parole authorities have to approve the formal transfers of parole orders.

Part 17 says that where an offender is being released from a participating jurisdiction, the officers are expected to assist home state agencies prepare parole reports and with pre-release planning, and with the variation, revocation or suspension of parole orders (Part 18).

Wherever practicable, prior to crossing a border of another participating jurisdiction to perform actions, the officers are to inform the community corrections agency in that jurisdiction.

Part 19 refers to community service orders, work orders or work and development orders, and that a home state agency may approach a community corrections agency in another jurisdiction to see if the offenders can perform requirements for such orders in the other state. 

Part 20 covers costs to be met by the supervising agency unless separate arrangements are made. The date and time of any offender travel interstate is to be worked out in consultation with proposed supervising agency.

Part 23 says that every 12 months a review is to occur to see whether the agreement needs to be amended to include cost-sharing arrangements. The cross-border community corrections services are to be reviewed at the same time as the review of the scheme and a longer term evaluation may include data on re-offending and compliance rates and the availability of rehabilitation, education and training programs in each jurisdiction.

Part 24 says that each community corrections agency must ensure staff are trained and resourced to perform functions under the cross-border legislation.

Print all pages in this section

Last updated: 11 January 2016

Give feedback about this page.

Share this page:

URL copied!