David Johnston (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Justice and Customs) Share this | Hansard source

I see that Senator Nettle does have some grasp of the way this might work. But I need to explain to her that, for evidence to be admissible as a primary question, every judicial officer in a proceeding can consider admissibility, so that evidence can be challenged, notwithstanding the fact that a late notification warrant gave rise to it. What we are saying is that providing notification to someone who is in certain specified circumstances such as I have already set out to you is counterproductive. In fact, it threatens the success of the operation to set out in warrant form the basis of the warrant and to provide advice to the person who is the subject of the warrant. That does not preclude the person from subsequently, upon the charges, challenging the evidence derived from the warrant. They would have that right with notification. They still have the right at the proceedings—which would hopefully and likely flow from the evidence gathered from the execution of the warrant.