David Harold Eastman v ACT Executive

David Harold Eastman sought a writ of mandamus against the ACT Executive, challenging the failure to consider his application for release on licence under section 295 of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT). Eastman argued that the ACT Executive, or potentially the Australian Capital Territory, had an obligation to review his application. The case raised questions about the proper defendant in such a scenario and whether either party had a duty to consider the application. Furthermore, the allocation of responsibility to consider the application by the Chief Minister to the Attorney-General under section 43 of the Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act 1988 (Cth) added complexity to the matter. The court needed to determine if the power to grant a release on licence stemmed from the prerogative of mercy, with the statute merely recording this inherent power.

The court first addressed the issue of identifying the correct defendant. It concluded that when the Executive, rather than a specific Minister, is assigned responsibility under an enactment of the Territory, the Parliament intended that the Territory itself be held legally responsible for the Executive’s conduct. This interpretation aligned with the intent behind section 43 of the Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act 1988 (Cth). Regarding the nature of the power to release an offender on licence, the court acknowledged that this power exists in two forms: the exercise of the prerogative of mercy and, for a limited class of individuals like the plaintiff, pursuant to Part 13.1 of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT). The court further found that the Attorney-General had not considered the application, as allocated to him by the Chief Minister under section 43 of the Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act 1988 (Cth), in accordance with the requirements of section 295 of the Crimes (Sentence Administration) Act 2005 (ACT).

The court ordered the Australian Capital Territory to consider Eastman's application for release on licence according to law. This decision mandated that the Territory undertake the proper consideration of the application, ensuring compliance with legal requirements.