Crimes (Amendment) Act 1996 (ACT)

This case involved a challenge to the constitutional validity of section 349ZX of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) as amended by the Crimes (Amendment) Act 1996 (ACT). The case was heard by the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. The applicant argued that the amended section 349ZX was invalid as it purported to authorise the taking of samples from a person in custody without their consent, and that this was inconsistent with the right to bodily integrity and autonomy protected by the common law.

The court was required to determine whether section 349ZX was consistent with the common law or whether it encroached upon the fundamental common law rights of bodily integrity and autonomy. The court considered whether the section went beyond what was reasonably necessary to enable the gathering of evidence and whether it imposed unreasonable intrusions upon the bodily integrity and autonomy of the person in custody.

The court found that section 349ZX was consistent with the common law as it did not authorise unreasonable intrusions upon the bodily integrity and autonomy of the person in custody. The court held that the section was limited to what was reasonably necessary to enable the gathering of evidence and did not impose unreasonable intrusions upon the bodily integrity and autonomy of the person in custody. The section was therefore valid and did not encroach upon the fundamental common law rights.

The court dismissed the applicant's challenge and held that section 349ZX of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) as amended by the Crimes (Amendment) Act 1996 (ACT) was valid and consistent with the common law. The court did not make any orders as the applicant's challenge was dismissed.