{"id":"tas:sr-2009-099","name":"Proclamation under the Witness (Identity Protection) Act 2006","slug":"proclamation-under-the-witness-identity-protection-act-2006","collection":"regulation","jurisdiction":"tas","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":"99 of 2009","makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":315146,"registerId":"tas-tas:sr-2009-099-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-08","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Proclamation under the Witness (Identity Protection) Act 2006","content":"> Proclamation under the Witness (Identity Protection) Act 2006\n\nI, the Governor in and over the State of Tasmania and its Dependencies in the Commonwealth of Australia, acting with the advice of the Executive Council, by this my proclamation made under [section 2 of the](/view/html/inforce/2026-04-12/act-2006-024#GS2@EN) [Witness (Identity Protection) Act 2006](/view/html/inforce/2026-04-12/act-2006-024) fix 1 September 2009 as the day on which that Act commences.\n\n10 August 2009\n\nPETER G. UNDERWOOD\n\nGovernor\n\nBy His Excellency's Command,\n\nLARA GIDDINGS\n\nMinister for Justice\n\nDisplayed and numbered in accordance with the *[Rules Publication Act 1953](/view/html/inforce/current/act-1953-050)*.\n\nNotified in the *Gazette* on 19 August 2009\n\nThis proclamation is administered in the Department of Justice.","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The proclamation does not alter the substantive scope or content of the Witness (Identity Protection) Act 2006; it only fixes the day the Act commences (see s 2). It therefore changes timing only, not legal rights, obligations or regulatory reach."},"complexity_factors":["Single, discrete legal effect: fixes a commencement date rather than creating substantive law","Explicit statutory basis: made under section 2 of the Witness (Identity Protection) Act 2006","Formal administrative steps: Governor’s signature, Ministerial command, Gazette notification, and Rules Publication Act numbering","No new regulatory details or delegated powers to interpret","Dependence on the content of the underlying Act for obligations, costs and compliance burdens"],"plain_english_summary":"This proclamation sets the commencement date for the Witness (Identity Protection) Act 2006 in Tasmania as 1 September 2009 (made under s 2 of the Act). It was issued by the Governor on Executive Council advice and is administered by the Department of Justice. Mechanically, the proclamation causes the Act’s obligations and protections to start on that date; the proclamation itself does not create new offences or fees beyond those in the Act."},"summary":{"complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This proclamation serves a single, narrow administrative purpose: commencing the Witness (Identity Protection) Act 2006 in Tasmania. There is no evidence of scope change from its original intent. It does exactly what a proclamation of this type is designed to do — nothing more, nothing less."},"complexity_factors":["The document itself is a bare proclamation with almost no substantive content — it is essentially just an official commencement notice","The underlying Act (Witness Identity Protection) involves moderately complex procedural and evidentiary concepts, but those are not contained in this instrument","No amending provisions, definitions, or operative clauses are visible in this document","Minimal interpretation challenges — purpose and effect are straightforward"],"plain_english_summary":"This proclamation brought the Witness (Identity Protection) Act 2006 into force in Tasmania on 19 August 2009. \n\nThe Act lets certain at‑risk witnesses (for example police, undercover operatives and other vulnerable witnesses) give evidence under a pseudonym to protect their safety while requiring courts and parties to manage fair trial protections."},"issue_detection":{"absurdities":[{"type":"self_contradicting","section":"Status Information - Currency of version","severity":"low","reasoning":"A file modification date of 2018 is inconsistent with a version that is purportedly unchanged since 2009. Either the version was amended in 2018 (in which case the currency date is wrong) or the 2018 modification was purely administrative (in which case the modification date is misleading as a legal reference point).","confidence":0.55,"description":"The legislation states it is 'current from 19 August 2009 to date' while simultaneously stating the file was last modified on 25 July 2018. If the version is current from 19 August 2009 and has never been amended in substance, a 2018 modification date suggests administrative or metadata changes occurred without any legislative amendment being recorded, creating an unexplained gap."},{"type":"impossible_compliance","section":"General - Document Structure","severity":"high","reasoning":"A proclamation that contains no operative text cannot fulfil any legal function. Citizens, courts, and administrators cannot comply with, enforce, or interpret a proclamation that declares or requires nothing. If this represents the complete published version, the instrument is a legal nullity dressed in administrative formatting.","confidence":0.72,"description":"The proclamation document contains no operative provisions whatsoever. A Proclamation under the Witness (Identity Protection) Act 2006 would ordinarily contain substantive operative text such as a commencement date, a declaration, or an appointment. The entire published document consists only of metadata, status information, and navigation elements, rendering it legally meaningless as a standalone instrument."},{"type":"other","section":"Status Information - Currency of version","severity":"low","reasoning":"A document cannot record its own future access date as a present fact at the time of drafting. While this may reflect automated system generation, embedding a future date as a currency reference in official legislation creates a logical impossibility: the document purports to have been verified at a point in time that had not yet occurred when it was presumably published.","confidence":0.65,"description":"The access timestamp states the document was accessed on '8 April 2026 at 1:43', which is a future date relative to any plausible drafting or publication date, yet is presented as a current factual statement within the legislative record. This creates a temporal paradox in the official legal record."},{"type":"other","section":"General - Repetition of headings","severity":"medium","reasoning":"Official legislation must be authoritative and unambiguous. A document where every heading appears twice without differentiation raises questions about which instance is operative, whether the duplication is intentional (suggesting two separate instruments merged), and whether the document as published accurately represents the instrument as made. This could create genuine interpretive difficulty if any heading carried operative legal weight.","confidence":0.8,"description":"Every heading and section title in the document is duplicated verbatim (e.g., 'Status Information Status Information', 'Currency of version Currency of version', 'Authorisation Authorisation'). This structural duplication, if reproduced in the official legislative record, suggests a systemic rendering error that undermines the authoritative nature of the published instrument."}],"contradictions":[{"severity":"medium","section_a":"Status Information - Currency of version ('current from 19 August 2009 to date')","section_b":"Authorisation ('File last modified 25 July 2018')","confidence":0.62,"description":"The instrument is stated to have been current and unchanged since 19 August 2009, yet the file modification date of 25 July 2018 indicates the document was altered nearly nine years after its stated commencement. These two statements cannot both be accurate: either the instrument was modified in 2018 (contradicting the unchanged currency claim) or it was not (making the 2018 modification date false or irrelevant)."},{"severity":"high","section_a":"Document title ('Proclamation under the Witness (Identity Protection) Act 2006')","section_b":"General document body (contains no operative proclamation text)","confidence":0.75,"description":"The document is titled as a Proclamation — a formal executive instrument with legal effect — but contains no operative proclamation language, no recitals, no declaration, and no substantive provisions. The title and the content are in direct contradiction: the former promises a legally operative instrument; the latter delivers only administrative metadata."}]},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":1,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This is a procedural commencement instrument with no substantive scope. It performs exactly the limited function it was designed for: bringing the parent Act into force on a specified date."},"complexity_factors":["Single operative provision: fixes one commencement date","No defined terms","No cross-references to other legislation (except citation of the parent Act)","No conditional logic or exceptions","Standard proclamation format — essentially a template with blanks filled in"],"plain_english_summary":"This is a **commencement proclamation** — a formal government notice that brings a law into force.\n\n**What it does:**\n- Sets **1 September 2009** as the date when Tasmania's *Witness (Identity Protection) Act 2006* officially starts operating.\n\n**Who made it:**\n- The **Governor of Tasmania** (Peter G. Underwood), acting on advice from the **Executive Council** (the Premier and senior ministers).\n- Signed off by **Lara Giddings**, then Minister for Justice.\n\n**Why this matters:**\n- Laws passed by Parliament don't always start immediately. This proclamation is the legal 'switch' that turns the Act on.\n- The *Witness (Identity Protection) Act* allows courts to protect the identity of vulnerable witnesses (such as undercover police or victims of serious crime) by letting them use pseudonyms (false names), give evidence via video link, or have their faces hidden from the accused.\n\n**Key detail:**\n- The Act was passed in **2006** but didn't start until **2009** — a three-year gap, likely because courts needed time to prepare procedures for handling protected witnesses."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/proclamation-under-the-witness-identity-protection-act-2006","history":"/api/acts/proclamation-under-the-witness-identity-protection-act-2006/history","analysis":"/api/acts/proclamation-under-the-witness-identity-protection-act-2006/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/proclamation-under-the-witness-identity-protection-act-2006/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/proclamation-under-the-witness-identity-protection-act-2006/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/proclamation-under-the-witness-identity-protection-act-2006/documents"}}