sec.319HWhen term imposed on offender by protected defendant is not indirect discrimination

### sec.319H When term imposed on offender by protected defendant is not indirect discrimination This section applies if a protected defendant imposes, or proposes to impose, a term— with which an offender with an attribute does not or is not able to comply; and with which a higher proportion of offenders without the attribute comply or are able to comply. In considering whether for the Anti-Discrimination Act , section 11 (1) (c) the term is reasonable, the tribunal must consider any relevant submissions made about any of the following— the security and good order of any corrective services facility in which the offender was detained when the protected defendant imposed, or proposed to impose, the term; the cost to the protected defendant of imposing an alternative term; the administrative and operational burden that imposing an alternative term might place on the protected defendant; the disruption to the protected defendant that imposing an alternative term might cause; the budget constraints of the protected defendant; the resources constraints of the protected defendant; whether the imposing of, or proposal to impose, the term adequately meets the needs of the offender, notwithstanding the availability of an alternative term that more ideally meets the needs of the offender; the need to respect offenders’ dignity; whether the imposing of, or proposal to impose, the term unfairly prejudices other offenders; any other matter the tribunal considers relevant. In this section— term includes condition, requirement or practice, whether or not written. s 319H ins 2008 No. 53 s 4 amd 2024 No. 47 s 54B (uncommenced amendment) (sec.319H-ssec.1) This section applies if a protected defendant imposes, or proposes to impose, a term— with which an offender with an attribute does not or is not able to comply; and with which a higher proportion of offenders without the attribute comply or are able to comply. (sec.319H-ssec.2) In considering whether for the Anti-Discrimination Act , section 11 (1) (c) the term is reasonable, the tribunal must consider any relevant submissions made about any of the following— the security and good order of any corrective services facility in which the offender was detained when the protected defendant imposed, or proposed to impose, the term; the cost to the protected defendant of imposing an alternative term; the administrative and operational burden that imposing an alternative term might place on the protected defendant; the disruption to the protected defendant that imposing an alternative term might cause; the budget constraints of the protected defendant; the resources constraints of the protected defendant; whether the imposing of, or proposal to impose, the term adequately meets the needs of the offender, notwithstanding the availability of an alternative term that more ideally meets the needs of the offender; the need to respect offenders’ dignity; whether the imposing of, or proposal to impose, the term unfairly prejudices other offenders; any other matter the tribunal considers relevant. (sec.319H-ssec.3) In this section— term includes condition, requirement or practice, whether or not written. - (a) with which an offender with an attribute does not or is not able to comply; and - (b) with which a higher proportion of offenders without the attribute comply or are able to comply. - (a) the security and good order of any corrective services facility in which the offender was detained when the protected defendant imposed, or proposed to impose, the term; - (b) the cost to the protected defendant of imposing an alternative term; - (c) the administrative and operational burden that imposing an alternative term might place on the protected defendant; - (d) the disruption to the protected defendant that imposing an alternative term might cause; - (e) the budget constraints of the protected defendant; - (f) the resources constraints of the protected defendant; - (g) whether the imposing of, or proposal to impose, the term adequately meets the needs of the offender, notwithstanding the availability of an alternative term that more ideally meets the needs of the offender; - (h) the need to respect offenders’ dignity; - (i) whether the imposing of, or proposal to impose, the term unfairly prejudices other offenders; - (j) any other matter the tribunal considers relevant.