Court Security and Custodial Services Regulations 1999

The Regulations revolve around a set of implementation concepts that operationalise the Act’s custodial and security functions. Key concepts and their regulatory treatment are:

• Person in custody. Defined by cross reference in regulation 9(1) and used throughout as the central subject of recording, searching, restraint and care obligations (see rr.6-9, rr.14-15, Parts 3 and 4). The term explicitly includes a person apprehended under the Mental Health Act (r.9(1)).

• Lock‑ups and court custody centres. The Regulations both prescribe specific physical lock‑ups (r.5) and treat court custody centres operationally. Regulation 2A limits the meaning of “court custody centre” in the Tableed regulations where the Commissioner of Police manages the centre under s.19 of the Act. This creates a bifurcation in applicability dependent on management arrangements.

• CEO approval and rules. Multiple duties require action “in a manner approved by the CEO” or “in accordance with any relevant CEO’s rules” (for example r.6(1), r.7(1), r.11(3), r.20, r.24(4)). That allocates to the CEO an ongoing governance role: approving record formats, training programmes and issuing implementation rules. The Regulations therefore operate as a skeleton of mandatory duties with the CEO filling in procedural detail.

• Recording and reporting. The Regulations require standardised record‑keeping about persons admitted (r.6), critical and reportable incidents (r.7), property of persons in custody (r.9), use of force that triggers medical care (r.11(3)), and specific notifications after use of restraints (rr.24-27). Records must be maintained “in a manner approved by the CEO” (r.6(1), r.7(1), r.26(2)).

• Searches. The Regulations exclude particular office holders and categories from search under Schedule 1 (r.4) and specify permitted search techniques for persons in custody and visitors (rr.14-15). Searches are constrained by requirements of expedition, decency and self‑respect (rr.14(b), 15(b)) and in some circumstances require CEO approval for invasive procedures (r.14(a)(v)).

• Restraints and chemical agents. Part 3 defines categories of restraint devices (temporary and holding) and lists permitted types (rr.17-18), plus the limited chemical agents that may be used and the classes of persons on whom they may be used (r.19). Use is limited to authorised persons trained under a CEO‑approved programme and must follow manufacturer instructions and that training (r.20). There are explicit supervisory and monitoring obligations where devices are used (rr.21-23, 26-27) and constraints on specific practices such as tying hands and legs together or shackling to a moving vehicle (r.21(4)-(5)).

• Property handling and disposal. Procedures for secure storage at courts and for lock‑ups/custody centres are mandated and uncollected property may be moved or disposed of after fixed periods; unclaimed property may be auctioned, given to associations or destroyed by CEO order, with auction proceeds to the Consolidated Account (r.10).

• Medical care and deaths. The CEO must ensure provision of first aid and emergency medical care (r.11(1)). If force has been used and injury may have resulted, the person in charge or person who took charge must arrange care “as soon as practicable” (r.11(2)). Deaths of persons for whom the CEO is responsible must be reported to the CEO without delay (r.12).

These concepts interact through cross‑references to the Act’s schedules (Schedule 1 and Schedule 2) and to external statutes such as the Police Act 1892 (r.4 reference to Aboriginal police liaison officers) and the Associations Incorporation Act 2015 (r.10(3)(b)). The CEO is the pivotal administrative actor, tasked with approving forms, training and rules that operationalise the Regulations.

The Regulations allocate duties and operational rules across several identifiable groups. The text itself identifies who is expected to act, who receives duties, and who are subjects of the duties.

• CEO and persons designated by the CEO. Many obligations depend on action by the CEO: approving record formats, training programmes and issuing rules (r.6(1), r.7(1), r.11(3), r.20, r.24(4)). The CEO must also ensure signage (r.13) and procedures for secure storage (r.10(1)). Where the Regulations say the CEO “is to ensure” something, that places implementation responsibility on the CEO’s office and its delegated staff.

• Persons in charge of lock‑ups and court custody centres. These individuals have operational duties: recording admissions and property (rr.6-9), recording incidents (r.7), providing information on request (r.8), ensuring first aid and medical arrangements (r.11), reporting deaths (r.12), authorising or receiving notification about use of restraints (r.24), and conducting or recording reviews following temporary restraint use (r.26).

• Authorised persons. Defined in r.16 and used throughout Part 3, authorised persons are those given powers under clause 12 of Schedule 2 to the Act. The Regulations regulate who may apply restraint devices and chemical agents, require that authorised persons be trained to CEO‑approved standards before use (r.20), and set specific use and reporting obligations for them (rr.21-27).

• Clerks of Parliament. Where copies of contracts are lodged under s.45(5)(a) of the Act, the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council must publish a Gazette notice within 14 days and make the contract available for inspection (r.3). This creates an administrative interaction between the procurement/contracting process under the Act and parliamentary disclosure.

• Visitors, judicial officers and designated officials. Regulation 4 lists categories of persons who are not to be searched under Schedule 1, including judges and other judicial officers, the Governor, members of Parliament acting in official capacity and police officers (r.4). Visitors more generally are subject to search procedures at lock‑ups and court custody centres (r.15) but are entitled to signage at entrances informing them of search rules (r.13).

• Persons in custody, intoxicated detainees and persons apprehended under the Mental Health Act. These are the primary subjects of the Regulations. They are the people whose details must be recorded (r.6), whose property is subject to inventory and disposal rules (r.9, r.10), who must be given information on request (r.8), and who may be searched or restrained subject to the specified limits and supervision requirements (rr.14-15, 17-27). The text distinguishes categories such as adult detainees and young persons for specific device prohibitions and supervision (rr.17-19, r.21(2)).

• Police and external custodial authorities. Regulation 2A excludes certain court custody centres if managed by the Commissioner of Police under s.19 of the Act from some regulations listed in the Table. This affects the Commissioner and police arrangements for management, creating a division between facilities subject to the CEO’s operational rules and those under police management.

• Third parties who take custody of abandoned property. The CEO may give unclaimed property to associations incorporated under the Associations Incorporation Act 2015 (r.10(3)(b)), which affects such associations and requires public notice before auction (r.10(4)).

The Regulations therefore primarily bind public sector bodies, custodial staff and authorised persons, while creating limited transparency effects for contractors (through r.3) and constrained interactions with private associations receiving abandoned property. The practical impacts on private sector businesses are indirect and arise mainly where private parties supply training, secure storage, equipment or are potential recipients of unclaimed property, all of which are shaped by CEO approvals and procedures.

The Regulations impose specific duties on public officials and set rights for persons in custody and visitors. Below I list the principal mandatory duties and the core entitlements or protections that are expressly recognised.

Duties imposed on the CEO and persons in charge

• CEO must ensure procedures for secure storage at court premises and at lock‑ups/court custody centres (r.10(1)). The CEO controls where uncollected property may be moved (r.10(2)) and may order sale, donation to incorporated associations or destruction of unclaimed property after six months (r.10(3)). The CEO must place signage at entrances informing visitors about search provisions (r.13).
• CEO approval is required for record‑keeping formats for information on persons admitted and for incident records (rr.6(1), 7(1)), and for training programmes for authorised persons (r.20).
• The person in charge of a lock‑up or court custody centre must ensure specified information is recorded for each person admitted: name, address, date of birth, legal custody form, health state, admission and discharge times, and authority for placement/removal (r.6(2)). The person in charge must also record property inventories (r.9(2)), critical/reportable incidents (r.7(2)) and, where temporary restraints are used and control established, must review whether holding restraints are required and record the results (r.26).

Duties on authorised persons and other staff

• Only authorised persons who have successfully completed CEO‑approved training may use restraint devices or chemical agents (r.20). Devices and agents must be used according to manufacturer instructions and the approved training procedures (r.20(b)).
• Authorised persons must not use improvised devices except on reasonable belief of necessity (r.21(1)). Use of temporary devices requires constant supervision and monitoring; records of checks must be maintained in the manner approved by the CEO (r.21(2)-(3), r.22(2), r.22(5)).
• When force has been used and there is a reasonable belief it may have caused injury, the person in charge or the person who took charge must arrange for first aid or emergency medical care as soon as practicable (r.11(2)). The arranging person must record date, time and other details required by the CEO (r.11(3)).
• Use of restraints or chemical agents in lock‑ups and court custody centres must be authorised by the person in charge, except in an emergency where an authorised person may act and must report to the person in charge as soon as practicable (r.24(1)-(3)). Similar reporting duties exist for use elsewhere or during transfers (r.25).

Recorded entitlements and protections for persons in custody and visitors

• Persons in custody, intoxicated detainees and persons apprehended under the Mental Health Act who request it must be informed, at a time convenient to the person in charge, of the contents of the warrant or instrument of custody, the reason for detention (for intoxicated detainees), anticipated discharge date/time, the details of property record (r.8). The person in charge may refuse if the request appears vexatious (r.8(2)).
• Persons in custody must be asked to sign the recorded inventory of their property on admission; a refusal must be noted with any reason provided (r.9(2)-(3)). Perishable, dangerous or unhygienic property may be destroyed at the person in charge’s order, with a record of the action (r.9(4)).
• Searches of persons in custody may use specified methods including electronic devices, visual, frisk, undress plus visual/hand search, and internal medical examination only with prior CEO approval to proceed (r.14(a)(i)-(v)). Searches of visitors are permitted by similar non‑invasive means (r.15). All searches must be expeditious and conducted with regard to decency and self‑respect (rr.14(b), 15(b)).
• Specific categories of officeholders and court personnel are exempt from being searched under Schedule 1 requirements: Governor, judges, magistrates, registrars, sheriffs acting in official capacity, police members and members of Parliament acting officially among others (r.4).

Operational constraints on specific practices

• Shackling or tying hands and legs together behind the back is prohibited (r.21(4)). Shackling or tying a person to a vehicle while it is in motion is prohibited (r.21(5)). Temporary restraints must not be used to place a person in the prone position (r.22(3)). Flexi‑cuffs must not be used unless a cut‑off tool is immediately available (r.22(4)). Temporary restraints must not be used longer than necessary to establish control (r.22(5)).

Rights of access and transparency

• When a contract is lodged under s.45(5)(a) of the Act with a Clerk of Parliament, the Clerk must publish a Gazette notice within 14 days specifying the date received, contents, parties and where the contract can be inspected and must make the contract available for inspection during office hours, allowing copies or extracts (r.3(1)-(4)). That creates a statutory right of public inspection as to the existence and availability of contracts of this kind.

The Regulations are procedural and prescriptive. They impose duties of record‑keeping, supervision, authorisation and reporting, along with operational constraints on restraint techniques and chemical agents. A number of these duties are qualified by CEO approval powers and by the Act’s underlying Schedule cross‑references, meaning the Regulations provide minimum standards that are to be fleshed out by the CEO’s rules and approved procedures.

The Regulations primarily use mandatory language , “must”, “is to ensure”, and “must be recorded” , to impose obligations, but the text provided does not contain explicit penalty clauses that specify criminal sanctions, fines or civil penalties for breach. Instead the Regulations create enforceable duties by reference to the Act and by requiring compliance with CEO‑approved procedures and rules.

• Absence of express penalties in the Regulations. Nowhere in the Regulations text provided is there a schedule of offences or specified fines for failure to comply with particular regulations. For example, requirements to record particulars (r.6), to record incidents (r.7), to ensure first aid and medical care (r.11) and to obtain CEO approval for training (r.20) are expressed as duties without attached fines or stated maximum penalties in the Regulations themselves.

• Enforcement modalities implied by the text. The Regulations vest practical enforcement levers in administrative oversight and record obligations. Numerous duties are subject to CEO approval and to “CEO’s rules” (for example r.6, r.7, r.11(3), r.20, r.24(4)). That structure suggests that enforcement is intended to operate through administrative supervision, requirements to produce approved records and compliance audits undertaken by the administrative head rather than by immediate penal sanctioning via the Regulations text. For instance, the CEO can order disposal of property (r.10(3)) and prescribe procedures for storage (r.10(1)), which are administrative steps rather than criminal penalties.

• Reporting triggers and documentary trails. The Regulations require after‑event reporting to particular officers: the person in charge must be informed after emergency use of restraints (r.24(3)), authorised persons must inform superintendents or persons in charge after restraint use while moving between custodial places (r.25(2)), and reviews and their recordings must be made (rr.26(2), 27(2)). These mandatory reporting and recording duties create documentary trails that can be used by oversight bodies, internal reviewers or courts to determine compliance. Enforcement may therefore be achieved by internal disciplinary processes, administrative sanctions, or being the basis for any enforcement or prosecution under the Act itself , however the Act’s enforcement provisions are not contained in the Regulations text provided.

• Interaction with the Act. The Regulations repeatedly cross‑refer to powers and duties in Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 of the Act and to sections such as s.45(5) (r.3) and s.19 (r.2A). Absent the Act text in the source provided, a reader should not assume the Regulations themselves prescribe criminal penalties; instead, the Act likely contains the statutory framework for offences, enforcement powers and sanctions. Any enforcement actions grounded in breach of the Regulations would therefore be taken under the Act’s enforcement provisions or through administrative measures available to the CEO and related public authorities.

• Practical enforcement levers available to managers. The person in charge and authorised persons are required to maintain records, obtain approvals and notify superiors. Failure to keep or produce those records, or to follow required procedures such as CEO‑approved training, would typically expose staff to internal disciplinary action and may expose the employer agency to review by parliamentary or executive oversight in the absence of explicit regulatory fines.

In short, the Regulations set prescriptive duties and detailed procedural obligations, but do not themselves list monetary penalties or criminal offences in the text provided. Enforcement therefore appears designed to operate through CEO governance, reporting and administrative oversight mechanisms and through the Act’s broader enforcement framework, which is referenced but not reproduced here.

The Regulations are expressly drafted as subsidiary instruments to the Court Security and Custodial Services Act 1999 and cross‑refer both internally and to other statutes. The principal interactions in the text provided are as follows.

• Primary dependence on the Act. The Regulations are explicit operationalisations of provisions in the Act. They regularly reference and implement Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 powers and duties in the Act (for instance searches under Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 are given procedural detail in rr.14-15). Regulation 3 implements a transparency requirement arising from s.45(5) of the Act, requiring Clerks of Parliament to publish contract details in the Gazette. The Regulation 2A specifically excludes certain court custody centres that are managed by the Commissioner of Police under s.19 of the Act from some regulations listed in its Table. Those cross‑references mean the Regulations cannot be read in isolation; the Act’s definitions, offences, powers of arrest, authorisation and institutional responsibilities will materially affect the operation of the Regulations.

• Police Act 1892. Regulation 4 expressly refers to “an Aboriginal police liaison officer appointed under Part IIIA of the Police Act 1892” when listing categories of persons who are not to be searched under Schedule 1 (r.4(i)). That creates a direct statutory interface with the Police Act for the purposes of search exemptions and underscores that law enforcement personnel retain particular status within the court security regime.

• Associations Incorporation Act 2015. Regulation 10(3)(b) explicitly contemplates transfer of uncollected or unclaimed property to an association incorporated under the Associations Incorporation Act 2015. That creates a statutory channel for disposal of unclaimed property and establishes contractual and compliance interactions with incorporated associations.

• Financial legislation. Regulation 10(5) requires that net proceeds of auction sales of unclaimed property be credited to the Consolidated Account. The compilation notes explain that references to the Consolidated Fund may now be read as the Consolidated Account under the Financial Legislation Amendment and Repeal Act 2006 and related reprint changes. This links the Regulations to public finance law and accounting processes.

• Medical, mental health and detention statutes. The Regulations treat persons apprehended under the Mental Health Act as persons in custody for many purposes (r.9(1)), creating an interface with the Mental Health Act for admission, property handling and custody procedures. Medical examinations as part of searches are permitted only with CEO approval and require a doctor or nurse to conduct internal body cavity examinations (r.14(a)(v)), which creates an intersection with health‑care regulatory regimes and professional standards though those regimes are not detailed in the Regulations.

• Administrative law and CEO discretion. The Regulations delegate substantial procedural discretion to the CEO in approving record formats, training programmes and issuing “CEO’s rules” (rr.6(1), r.7(1), r.11(3), r.20, r.24(4)). That delegation makes administrative law principles and statutory limits on delegated power relevant. Decisions by the CEO about approvals, disposal of property or issuance of rules will be subject to the usual administrative law constraints (natural justice, reasonableness, statutory power) even though those constraints and remedies are not codified in the Regulations themselves.

• Contract transparency and parliamentary oversight. Regulation 3 requires Clerk publication and inspection of contracts lodged under the Act (s.45(5)(a) as cited). That creates a link to parliamentary practice and public information law by compelling notice in the Gazette and public access to contract documents during office hours.

Overall, the Regulations act as implementation instruments that rely on, supplement and interact with several other statutes and doctrines. They deliver procedural detail but rely on the Act for definitions, the scope of powers, and (likely) sanctions. They also create routine interfaces with police legislation, mental health legislation, incorporation law for associations, and public finance rules.

The Regulations have been the subject of multiple amendments since their gazettal. The compilation table contained in the instrument records each amendment and commencement. Key points from that history are:

• Original gazettal and commencement. The Court Security and Custodial Services Regulations 1999 were published in the Government Gazette on 17 December 1999 at pages 6226-6228 and commenced on 18 December 1999 (r.2; compilation table).

• 2000 amendment. The Court Security and Custodial Services Amendment Regulations 2000 were gazetted 28 July 2000 and commenced 31 July 2000. This amendment inserted regulations including Regulation 2A which clarifies that certain references to court custody centres do not include centres managed under s.19 arrangements with the Commissioner of Police (r.2A, Gazette 28 Jul 2000 p. 3997).

• 2005 amendment. The Regulations were amended on 30 December 2005 (gazette p. 6877-8). Regulation 5 prescribing lock‑ups was inserted or amended at that time; the present r.5 listing Albany, Carnarvon and Kalgoorlie lock‑ups bears the note “inserted: Gazette 30 Dec 2005 p. 6878; amended: Gazette 18 Dec 2015 p. 5075” indicating later updates to the list of prescribed lock‑ups.

• 2008 amendment. The Regulations were amended by instrument gazetted 18 March 2008 (p. 868) with the operative dates noted in the compilation table. Regulation 4 was amended in March 2008 (see note at r.4).

• 2015 and 2016 amendments. Further amendments occurred in December 2015 and April 2016 (gazetted 18 Dec 2015 p. 5075 and 26 Apr 2016 p. 1276 respectively). The 2015 instrument included additional amendments to the prescribed lock‑ups and other technical updates. The 2016 instrument includes further amendments referencing r.16 definition changes and other technical matters (r.16 amended Gazette 26 Apr 2016 p. 1276). A 2016 Corrective Services Regulations Amendment (Associations Incorporation) Regulation (gazette 30 Dec 2016 p. 5967-8) made consequential changes affecting the consolidation of auction proceeds into the Consolidated Account (r.10(5) and compilation note 2).

• Reprints. Two reprints are recorded: Reprint 1 as at 16 March 2007 (including earlier amendments), and Reprint 2 as at 5 May 2017 which incorporates amendments up to that date (compilation table). The compilation table lists each amending instrument and its commencement dates, providing a traceable statutory history.

• Specific textual amendments tracked in the Regulations. Examples of discrete amendments include deletion of paragraph (j) in r.4 by later amendment (note at r.4). Regulation insertions and amendments are footnoted throughout the text, indicating specific provisions that were added or changed at particular Gazette dates.

The compilation table in the instrument is the authoritative chronological listing of amendments recorded in the provided source. It shows an early round of amendments in 2000, further substantive updates in 2005 and 2008, and later amendments in 2015-2016, together with reprints that incorporate those changes. For any operational or compliance work, practitioners should check the reprint dates and the Gazette entries cited for the precise wording in force at any relevant time.

The Regulations as reproduced here do not record any litigation or case law. The text contains no schedule or note of judicial decisions interpreting the Regulations, and there are no court citations included in the instrument itself. Accordingly, the source contains no primary litigation history to summarise.

Practical points for those researching litigation or judicial interpretation

• The Regulations repeatedly cross‑refer to the Court Security and Custodial Services Act 1999 and to its Schedule 1 and Schedule 2, including powers to search and to authorise the use of force. Any judicial interpretation or litigation about the practical application of search powers, use of restraints, or procedural obligations under the Regulations is likely to arise in connection with contested applications of the Act and those Schedules rather than the Regulations alone. The absence of cases in the text means a practitioner must consult external legal databases, court judgments and administrative review decisions to locate any case law engaging these specific regulatory provisions.

• Evidentiary role of required records. The Regulations require detailed recording and reporting (rr.6-7, rr.11, 24-27). If disputes or claims arise in court about alleged misuse of restraints, injury, or failures to provide medical care, those statutory records will be primary documentary material. The Regulations therefore create a recordkeeping obligation that has evidentiary utility in litigation even if the Regulations themselves are not the focus of reported authorities.

• Administrative review and judicial review. Decisions by the CEO to approve or refuse training programmes, to authorise disposal of property, or to make rules implementing the Regulations will be susceptible to administrative law challenge (judicial review) where jurisdictional error, failure of natural justice or unreasonableness is alleged. Because the Regulations delegate significant discretion to the CEO, litigation could occur over the exercise of those discretionary powers, but no such cases are referenced in the Regulations text.

• Contract transparency compliance. Regulation 3 requires the Clerks of Parliament to publish notice and provide inspection for contracts lodged under s.45(5)(a) of the Act. Non‑compliance with this Gazette and inspection duty could, in principle, be the subject of review or parliamentary inquiry, though again there is no litigation recorded in this instrument.

Given that the Regulations do not themselves document litigation, practitioners preparing litigation strategies or compliance assessments should search WA court and tribunal databases, parliamentary records and Ombudsman or inspectorate reports for decisions and reviews that engage the Act and these Regulations. The lack of a litigation history in the Regulations means that precedent analysis must be undertaken outside this instrument.

The Regulations appear procedural and operational but contain multiple points where implementation friction, unintended consequences, or compliance traps may arise. Below are concrete “gotchas” grounded in the text.

1. CEO dependence creates single‑point discretion. Many core obligations require formats, training and procedures to be “approved by the CEO” or to follow “CEO’s rules” (see rr.6(1), 7(1), 11(3), 20, 24(4)). That means that until the CEO publishes approvals and rules, staff may lack clear actionable standards. This can produce uncertainty for front‑line staff about record formats, training standards and permitted uses of medical examinations (r.14(a)(v)). The practical consequence is operational lag and potential disputes over whether someone had adequate authorisation or training when an event occurs.

2. Category distinctions matter for device and chemical use. The Regulations permit particular temporary and holding devices and chemical agents only for particular categories of persons (rr.17-19). For example, chemical agents (OC and CS) may be used to establish control over “any adult person in custody except an adult who is a detainee” (r.19). The splitting of categories (adult detainee versus other adult persons in custody) means classification at the operational level can have immediate consequences for what force or agents are lawful to use. Failure to correctly classify could lead to unlawful use of particular agents, though penalties are not specified in the Regulations.

3. Search limitations and invasive searches require CEO approval. Internal medical examinations of body cavities are permitted only if the person in charge has first obtained CEO approval (r.14(a)(v)). This condition could be problematic where immediate evidence or safety considerations exist but CEO approval is not readily obtainable. The Regulations permit emergency restraints without prior approval (r.24(2)) but do not create a similar emergency carve‑out for invasive searches.

4. Records must be in a manner “approved by the CEO”. The obligation to record admissions, incidents and monitoring checks “in a manner approved by the CEO” (rr.6(1), 7(1), 21(6), 26(2)) means records that deviate from the approved formats risk being treated as non‑compliant even if they contain the information. That creates operational risk over record format conformity.

5. Flexi‑cuff safety equipment requirement. Temporary plastic handcuffs (flexi‑cuffs) must not be used unless a cut‑off tool is immediately available (r.22(4)). Any operational movement that could isolate an authorised person from the cut‑off tool or reliance on improvised tools may breach this requirement.

6. Continuous supervision and monitoring obligations. Temporary restraints require constant supervision while in use (r.21(2), r.22(2)). In understaffed settings or during transfers, meeting continuous supervision may be operationally difficult, generating compliance risk.

7. Prohibition on particular restraint methods. Shackling hands and legs together behind the back and tying a person to a moving vehicle are absolute prohibitions (r.21(4)-(5)). These prohibitions can be breached inadvertently if staff rely on informal practices used elsewhere.

8. Disposal of property and auction notices. Uncollected property may be auctioned after six months (r.10(3)), but the CEO must publish notice in the Gazette at least once before auction (r.10(4)). Failure to publish the Gazettal Notice invalidates the procedural requirement, potentially creating liability for improper disposal.

9. Exemptions from searches include many officeholders. r.4 lists officeholders who are not to be searched under Schedule 1. The list is particular and includes acting deputies “acting in official capacity”. Misapplication of search exemptions could give rise to complaints or scrutiny.

10. Reporting chains during transfers. When restraints or chemical agents are used while a person is being moved, the authorised person must inform either the receiving prison superintendent or the person in charge at the receiving lock‑up/custody centre as soon as practicable (r.25(2)). If transfers occur to multiple locations or via third parties, tracing proper notification may be complex in practice.

11. No explicit penalties set in the Regulations. The absence of stated fines or criminal penalties in this text means governance relies on administrative enforcement and the Act’s provisions. This can complicate enforcement planning where proof of breach is needed for disciplinary or legal action.

12. Interaction with police management. Regulation 2A excludes certain court custody centres managed by the Commissioner of Police under s.19 of the Act from a defined subset of regulations. Practitioners must verify management arrangements for each custody centre to know which rules apply. The Table in r.2A provides the list of regulations affected; failing to check may result in applying the wrong procedural regime.

13. Treatment of persons apprehended under the Mental Health Act. The Regulations treat such persons as “persons in custody” for property records and other duties (r.9(1)), which intersects with health sector confidentiality and care obligations. Staff must be aware that mental health apprehension status triggers standard custody record and property procedures.

14. Record signatures and refusals. If a person in custody refuses to sign a property record, the person who took charge must inform the person in charge, who must endorse the record with a note and reasons if given (r.9(3)). Failure to follow this procedure could render the inventory defective.

These operational “gotchas” arise from the text’s allocation of discretion, categorical bans and duties conditional on CEO approval. Practitioners should ensure written CEO rules and approved formats are available, that staff training addresses classification and emergency contexts, and that recordkeeping and reporting processes are tested in realistic transfer and emergency scenarios.

Compliance with the Regulations requires establishing administrative systems, training regimes and operational checklists that map statutory obligations to day‑to‑day practice. Below are concrete compliance steps, keyed to regulatory provisions.

1. Establish CEO‑approved record formats and incident registers

• Action: The CEO’s office must publish and distribute approved templates for admission records (r.6), incident logs (r.7) and monitoring/check logs (r.21(6), r.26(2)). Each lock‑up and court custody centre must use only the approved format.
• Why: rr.6(1) and 7(1) require records “in a manner approved by the CEO”. Using non‑approved templates risks being non‑compliant even if information is captured.

2. Implement mandatory training and authorisation regime

• Action: Create, submit and obtain CEO approval for training programmes for authorised persons who may use restraint devices and chemical agents. Maintain a register of authorised persons, training completion dates and revalidation intervals (r.20).
• Why: r.20 requires that only authorised persons who have successfully undergone CEO‑approved training may use restraint devices or chemical agents.

3. Operationalise device inventories and safe tool availability

• Action: Maintain inventories of permitted temporary and holding restraint devices noted in rr.17-18, including flexi‑cuff cut‑off tools immediately available at locations where flexi‑cuffs may be used (r.22(4)). Ensure availability of manufacturer instructions for all devices and that staff follow them (r.20(b)).
• Why: Compliance requires following manufacturer instructions and ensuring safety equipment is present where flexi‑cuffs are authorised.

4. Duty rosters to ensure continuous supervision

• Action: Design staffing rosters and contingency plans to guarantee constant supervision whenever temporary restraint devices are applied (r.21(2), r.22(2)). Include procedures to escalate if supervision cannot be maintained.
• Why: The Regulations impose constant supervision during temporary restraint use and require monitoring records (r.21(3)).

5. Develop medical care protocols and recordkeeping

• Action: Ensure first aid and emergency medical care procedures are drafted, approved and embedded (r.11(1)). Require immediate arrangement of care “as soon as practicable” after force is used where injury is reasonably suspected, and record the date/time/details in the CEO‑approved manner (r.11(2)-(3)).
• Why: The Regulations impose both a duty to arrange care and a recording obligation that is required for compliance and audit.

6. Create notification and reporting checklists for use of restraints

• Action: Draft clear checklists specifying when prior authorisation from the person in charge is required (r.24(1)), and the emergency reporting pathway where prior authorisation is not possible (r.24(2)-(3)). For transfers or use outside lock‑ups, require authorised persons to notify the receiving superintendent or person in charge as soon as practicable and to record reasons (r.25).
• Why: Timely reporting is mandated and forms part of the compliance record.

7. Implement property handling, storage and disposal procedures

• Action: Ensure secure storage facilities are in place at court premises and lock‑ups/custody centres (r.10(1)). Track deposited property and establish 24‑hour movement procedures for uncollected property (r.10(2)). For property unclaimed after six months, implement CEO‑ordered disposal protocols, including Gazettal notice before public auction (r.10(3)-(4)). Account for auction proceeds to the Consolidated Account (r.10(5)).
• Why: Failure to follow the disposal notice and accounting steps would breach procedural requirements.

8. Signage and visitor information compliance

• Action: Place the mandated signs at court premises, lock‑ups and court custody centre entrances informing visitors of applicable search clauses (r.13). Train staff on the content and on handling requests for information by persons in custody (r.8).
• Why: r.13 requires signage; r.8 requires that persons admitted who request information be informed as relevant.

9. Search procedure and dignity safeguards

• Action: Adopt written search protocols that reflect permitted methods in rr.14-15, including the special requirement that internal examinations require CEO approval (r.14(a)(v)). Emphasise expediency, decency and self‑respect in all search training and supervision.
• Why: Searches must be conducted expeditiously and with regard to decency and self‑respect (r.14(b), r.15(b)).

10. Review and audit regime

• Action: Implement an audit timetable that reviews compliance with the Regulations, focusing on training records, incident logs, medical response records and restraint usage reviews (r.26, r.27). Require random audits of supervision logs and restraint monitoring entries.
• Why: rr.26-27 require reviews after control is established with temporary restraints and recording of review results in a CEO‑approved manner.

11. Clarify applicability for police‑managed facilities

• Action: Map each court custody centre to its management arrangement. Where a centre is managed by the Commissioner of Police under s.19 of the Act, check whether the centre is excluded from specific regulations under r.2A and identify which regulations in the r.2A Table apply.
• Why: r.2A narrows applicability of certain regulations and misclassification may produce noncompliance.

12. Document and retain refusal notes and signatures

• Action: On admission inventory, require persons in custody to sign. If refusal occurs, ensure the capturing staff member informs the person in charge who will note the refusal and any reason on the record (r.9(2)-(3)).
• Why: The Regulations prescribe the procedure for refusals; following the exact procedure is necessary to maintain legal defensibility.

13. Pre‑approve associations for property transfer

• Action: If the CEO intends to gift property to associations, vet the associations to ensure incorporation status under the Associations Incorporation Act 2015 and document the transfer with audit trails (r.10(3)(b)).
• Why: r.10(3)(b) permits giving property to incorporated associations and the CEO must follow required procedures.

14. Contract disclosure pipeline

• Action: When contracts are lodged under s.45(5)(a) of the Act, coordinate with the Clerk of the relevant House to ensure Gazette publication within 14 days and arrange for inspection availability, including providing storage and copy facilities (r.3).
• Why: r.3 imposes specific steps and timelines for contract publication and inspection.

15. Maintain clear classification policies for detainees

• Action: Implement written policies defining “detainee” and other custody categories to ensure correct application of device and chemical agent rules (rr.17-19). Ensure staff are trained to apply classification consistently and document the basis for any classification.
• Why: Allowed devices and chemical agents differ by category and misclassification can lead to impermissible use.

By translating regulatory language into concrete administrative instruments , approved templates, approved training programmes, equipment inventories, staffing rosters, signage and audit schedules , public authorities operating lock‑ups and court custody centres can create defensible compliance systems. The repeated requirement for CEO approval means that centralisation of approvals and clear dissemination of CEO rules are critical first steps.