Review of the Police Powers (Drug Premises) Act 2001 - NSW ...

8.4. Discussion paper responses about the level of drug supply being
targeted by the Act
Many respondents to our discussion paper, including the New South Wales Legal Aid Commission, the Law Society of New South Wales,
drug advocacy groups and health professionals, believed that the Drug Premises Act was not targeting high-level drug supply. The Law
Society of New South Wales argued that the “reality is that drug users and low-level street dealers, who are themselves drug users, are
being targeted by the provisions” of the Act. 730
Family Drug Support, an organisation that offers support for families affected by drug use, also commented that the powers in the Act
did not effectively capture “major and organised criminals.” 731 According to the NUAA the types of drug premises that were reportedly
being targeted also suggested that the law was not focusing on high level drug supply. 732 Commenting on the descriptions of drug
premises that were provided in Cabramatta Report on Progress, 733 the NUAA submission noted that these descriptions were indicative of
“lower level shooting rooms and houses where smaller amounts of drugs are sold and used”. 734 NUAA also argued that lower numbers
of charges for the offences of organising or conducting and allowing a premises to be used as a drug premises “could indicate that the
smaller time users and user dealers are being targeted.” 735
The NSW Legal Aid Commission argued that the size of the penalties for offences under the Act and the “low standard of proof
required”, 736 evidenced that the Drug Premises Act was “never intended to target high level involvement in the drug trade”. 737 The
custodial penalties for the three key offences created by the Drug Premises Act are a maximum one year’s imprisonment for a first
offence, and five years for a second offence. 738 The NSW Legal Aid Commission expressed the view that where there is more serious
involvement, police operations are directed toward the detection of offences such as the on-going supply of drugs under the Drug Misuse
and Trafficking Act, which carries a maximum penalty of twenty years.
Family Drug Support also raised the issue of the resources required to use the Act. They expressed concern that substantial police
resources appeared to be involved in using the Drug Premises Act, and that “such a high level of activity would be better directed in other
areas of drug detection.” 739
NSW Police were also of the view, as we discuss more fully later in this chapter, that the Drug Premises Act may be more effective against
medium and low level suppliers, as “high level suppliers … are unlikely to risk police scrutiny by allowing their premises to be used for
supply”. 740
8.4.1. Police views on the level of drug supply that the Drug Premises Act is targeting
In its submission, NSW Police stated that they believed the powers in the Act may be “more effective against medium and low level
suppliers”. 741 The submission also noted that high level suppliers are “unlikely to risk police scrutiny by allowing their premises to be used
for supply.” 742 A number of police we spoke to in the course of this review also made this point.
730 Submission, Law Society of New South Wales, 20 August 2003.
731 Submission, Family Drug Support, 31 July 2003.
732 Submission, New South Wales User and Aids Association, received 5 August 2003. In their submission, the New South Wales Users and Aids
Association describe themselves as a “peer-based community organisation of people who use drugs illicitly and their friends and allies”.
733 NSW Government, Cabramatta Report on Progress, April 2002.
734 Submission, New South Wales User and Aids Association, received 5 August 2003. NUAA’s comments on these descriptions of drug premises
are set out in more detail in the Chapter on the use of the Drug Premises Act in Cabramatta.
735 Ibid, received 5 August 2003.
736 The NSW Legal Aid Commission appear to be referring to the reversal of the onus of proof in respect of the Drug Premises Act offences of being
found on, entering or leaving drug premises, and the offence of organising, assisting or conducting drug premises. The reverse onus of proof is
discussed in the Chapter, “Drug Premises Offences”.
737 Submission, NSW Legal Aid Commission, 30 July 2003.
738 These penalties are for the offences of being on, entering or leaving drug premises, allowing use of premises as drug premises, and organising
drug premises, under sections 12, 13 and 14 of the Drug Premises Act respectively. These first and second offences may also be punishable by a
fine of $5500 or $55000.
739 Submission, Family Drug Support, 31 July 2003.
740 Submission, NSW Police, received 12 August 2003.
741 Ibid.
742 Ibid.
134
NSW Ombudsman
Review of the Police Powers (Drug Premises) Act 2001