Parliamentary Precincts Act 2001

The Act uses a small number of repeatedly applied legal concepts. Each concept is defined or developed in the text; practitioners should map these definitions to operational practices.

• Parliamentary precincts. Defined to include the Parliamentary reserve (described by plan in the Schedule and referenced to a Crown reserve instrument) and any additional land or premises declared by Governor in Council order (s 3; s 6(1)). An order requires recommendation by one or both presiding officers and may specify a revocation date (s 6(1)-(3)). Electorate offices are excluded from being declared part of the precincts (s 6(4)). Part 2 operates despite Land Act 1958 and Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978 (s 5(1)).

• Presiding officers. The term draws its meaning from the Constitution Act 1975 by cross-reference (s 3). The presiding officers are the legal decision-makers for control and management of the precincts, jointly and severally responsible, and empowered to enter leases, licences and agreements concerning works and other matters (s 8(1); s 9(1)-(3)). Their powers are broad but explicitly do not permit the mortgage, sale or disposal of any part of the Parliamentary reserve (s 9(4)). The presiding officers may delegate most powers to specified parliamentary officers but not certain specified powers, such as the power to grant leases/licences or to give certain directions (s 10).

• Authorised officers. The term is defined expansively to include named presiding and parliamentary officers, police officers and protective services officers (s 3). Authorised officers exercise the security powers in Part 3, but remain subject to directions from presiding officers in the exercise of any power or function under Part 3, including directions not to exercise or to cease exercising a power (s 15(1)). Presiding officers cannot direct police or protective services officers to exercise a power (s 15(2)).

• Memorandum of understanding. The Act allows presiding officers to make an MOU with the Chief Commissioner of Police about police functions within the precincts (s 11(1)). The MOU may empower police or protective services officers to carry out specified functions without repeated presiding-officer authorisation and may impose conditions and directions about exercise of those functions (s 11(2)(a)-(c)). The Act explicitly states that the functions under an MOU are in addition to and not in derogation of any police powers as authorised officers or police officers (s 11(3)). MOUs continue in force despite dissolution or expiration of a House and until revoked by presiding officers or the Chief Commissioner (s 11(4)).

• Directions and enforcement. Part 3 creates a regime for authorised officers to give directions to leave or not to enter for security and good order, to remove persons, to require names and addresses, and to arrest without warrant for contraventions of specified provisions (ss 16-21). Directions may be oral or by conspicuous written notice and can apply to the whole precincts or any part (ss 16(2), 18(1)-(2)). Time-limited exclusions are provided: default 24 hours if no period is specified; up to 7 days otherwise; presiding officers can extend by written notice while the initial direction applies (s 16(3)-(5)). Procedural safeguards include the requirement that an authorised officer state name and position before giving an oral direction unless in uniform or ceremonial dress (s 18(3)) and requirements before detaining or arresting a person (s 21(5)).

• Evidentiary certificates and judicial notice. Two forms of certificate operate as prima facie evidence. A presiding officer or specified parliamentary officers can certify that a police or protective services officer was authorised under an MOU and whether a condition or direction applied; courts must take judicial notice of such signatures and, absent contrary evidence, the certificate is proof of those facts (s 13). Similarly, a presiding officer can certify that a person is an authorised officer or whether a direction under s 15 was given in relation to the exercise of particular powers; again courts must take judicial notice (s 27(1)-(2)).

These concepts intersect to produce an operational architecture where presiding officers set policy, MOUs with police specify operational cooperation, authorised officers execute security directions, and statutory certificates streamline litigation about authorisation and directions (ss 8, 11, 15, 13, 27). The Act also preserves parliamentary privilege and existing powers outside the Act, so the statutory regime overlays rather than supplants other authorities (s 4; s 14).

The Act affects distinct groups differentially because it creates roles and imposes obligations and limitations.

• Presiding officers. The most directly empowered actors are the presiding officers. They decide what land is included in the precincts by recommending orders to the Governor in Council (s 6). They are jointly and severally responsible for control and management of the precincts and have broad power to grant leases, licences and agreements (s 8(1); s 9(1)-(3)). They may enter MOUs with the Chief Commissioner of Police (s 11) and issue written notices extending exclusion periods (s 16(5)). Their signatures on certificates have evidentiary weight in prosecutions (ss 13, 27).

• Authorised officers and named parliamentary officers. The Act defines a discrete category of authorised officers which includes the President and Speaker, Usher of the Black Rod, Serjeant-at-Arms, Clerks and Deputy Clerks, police officers and protective services officers (s 3). These authorised officers may give directions, remove persons, require name and address, detain or arrest for contraventions, and prosecute offences under the Act (ss 16-21, 26). They are subject to directions from presiding officers in exercising powers under Part 3 (s 15(1)).

• Police officers and protective services officers. The 2014 amendments introduced an express cross-reference to the Victoria Police Act 2013 definitions for police officer and protective services officer and modified several provisions (see Table of Amendments). Police and protective services officers may act as authorised officers and may be empowered by a memorandum of understanding to exercise specified functions within the precincts without repeated direction (s 11(2)(a)). They must comply with conditions and directions in the MOU (s 12(1)), but failure to comply does not itself invalidate actions taken under the MOU (s 12(2)). When police or protective services officers effect an arrest without warrant under s 21(1), they must as soon as practicable bring the person before the Magistrates' Court (s 21(2)).

• Members of Parliament. The Act expressly excludes certain authorisations from applying to members. Part 3 does not authorise directions to members to leave or not enter, removals of members or prevention of members from entering the precincts (s 14(1)). Part 3 also does not affect other powers that may exist outside the Act to remove members or give directions (s 14(2)).

• Members of the public, visitors, protesters, contractors, tenants, leaseholders and users of the precincts. Individuals entering or within the precincts are subject to directions from authorised officers to leave or not enter if necessary for good order and security; failure to comply attracts offences and penalty units (ss 16, 22-25). Lessees or licencees that enter into arrangements with the presiding officers under s 9 will be subject to the terms set by the presiding officers (s 9(3)). Landowners whose property is proposed to be declared part of the precincts are affected procedurally because an order requires a presiding-officer recommendation and an order may have a revocation date (s 6(1)-(3)).

• The Governor in Council. The Governor in Council has the formal power to declare land part of the precincts or to revoke such orders on recommendation from presiding officers (ss 6-7). The Governor in Council is therefore the vehicle for creating or removing statutory precinct boundaries, albeit acting on recommendation.

• Courts and prosecutors. The Act allows authorised officers to institute prosecution for offences under the Act (s 26). The courts are obliged to take judicial notice of specified signatures on certificates, which streamlines proof on questions about authorisation and directions (ss 13(2), 27(2)).

• Administrative and security staff. The Act affects staff through delegation rules. Presiding officers may delegate most powers to named parliamentary officers (Usher, Serjeant-at-Arms, Clerks and Deputies) but cannot delegate certain powers including s 9(2) and (3), s 15, s 16(5) or the power of delegation itself (s 10).

In short, the Act centrally affects presiding officers and the authorised-officer cohort as decision-makers and enforcers, while affecting the public and any persons on precinct land by creating defined security rules, time-limited exclusion powers and criminal penalties for non-compliance (ss 8-11; ss 16-25).

The Act both creates duties and preserves pre-existing rights. It assigns responsibilities to presiding officers and authorised officers, imposes obligations on police and protective services officers under MOUs, and describes rights of persons in relation to members and to procedural safeguards.

Duties created by the Act

• Control and management. Presiding officers are under a positive statutory responsibility to control and manage the Parliamentary precincts jointly and severally (s 8(1)). This includes decision-making about leases, licences and agreements (s 9(1)-(3)).

• Memorandum of understanding. Presiding officers have the power, and arguably the duty in the exercise of management, to enter into MOUs with the Chief Commissioner of Police relating to police functions within the precincts (s 11(1)). An MOU may empower police or protective services officers to exercise specified functions without recurrent presiding-officer direction, and may set conditions and directions about how the functions are performed (s 11(2)).

• Compliance with MOUs. Police officers and protective services officers have a duty to comply with conditions and directions applying to functions under an MOU (s 12(1)). That duty sits alongside their usual police powers because the Act states the MOU functions are in addition to and not in derogation of police powers (s 11(3)).

• Exercise of security powers on reasonable grounds. An authorised officer may direct a person to leave or not enter the precincts if the authorised officer believes on reasonable grounds that the direction is necessary for good order and security (s 16(1)). The reasonable-grounds requirement also appears in removal powers which may be exercised only where the authorised officer believes on reasonable grounds the person failed to comply with a direction or committed or attempted to commit an offence (s 19(3)).

• Arrest and detention procedures. Where a non-police authorised officer arrests and detains a person, the Act requires notification to police, delivery of the person into police custody as soon as practicable, informing the detained person of reasons for detention, and requesting police assistance (s 21(3)-(5)). Police or protective services officers arresting must bring the person before the Magistrates' Court as soon as practicable (s 21(2)).

Rights, protections and preserved powers

• Members’ immunity from Part 3 enforcement. The Act expressly protects members by providing that Part 3 does not authorise giving directions to members to leave, removing members or preventing them from entering the precincts (s 14(1)). It also does not affect other powers that exist outside the Act in relation to members (s 14(2)).

• Procedural protections for persons subject to directions. Oral directions require the authorised officer to state name and position unless in uniform or ceremonial dress (s 18(3)). Before requiring name and address under s 20, an authorised officer must state their own name and position (unless in uniform), inform the person that the authorised officer believes an offence has been committed by failing to leave, and inform the person that it is an offence to refuse or give false details (s 20(2)(a)-(c)).

• Evidentiary rules. Certificates signed by presiding officers or specified parliamentary officers operate as evidence and, absent contrary evidence, proof of matters such as whether a police officer was authorised under an MOU or whether a direction under s 15 had been given (ss 13(1), 27(1)). Courts must take judicial notice of the signatures (ss 13(2), 27(2)). This alters proof burdens in prosecutions.

• Delegation limits. Presiding officers may delegate most powers to specified parliamentary officers, but not the power to grant leases or licences under s 9(2)-(3), not powers under s 15, not the power under s 16(5), and not the power to delegate (s 10). This preserves certain core decision points with the presiding officers themselves.

• Non-derogation of privileges and other powers. Section 4 declares that nothing in the Act derogates from the privileges, immunities and powers of Parliament, the Houses, presiding officers, members, committees and staff. Likewise, the Act does not remove other powers existing outside it to remove members or give directions (s 14(2)). These clauses preserve existing constitutional and parliamentary safeguards.

Key duties therefore sit with presiding officers for management and with authorised officers for security enforcement, while key rights and protections preserve members’ privileges and set procedural steps before detention, arrest and identity information are required (ss 8, 11, 15, 20, 21, 4, 14). The statute uses evidentiary certificates to simplify proof of authorisation, and it places some binding obligations on police and protective services officers when acting under an MOU (ss 12, 13).

The Act creates criminal offences specific to behaviour in the Parliamentary precincts and prescribes enforcement mechanisms, arrest powers and evidentiary aids.

Offences and penalties

• Failure or refusal to leave when directed. A person must not fail or refuse to leave the Parliamentary precincts when directed to do so by an authorised officer under s 16(1). The penalty for contravention is 10 penalty units (s 22).

• Entering or re-entering contrary to direction. A person must not enter, re-enter or attempt to enter the precincts contrary to a direction under s 16(1) or a presiding-officer further direction under s 16(5). The penalty is 10 penalty units (s 23).

• Refusal to give name and address. A person within the precincts must not fail or refuse to give name and address when required under s 20, and must not give a false or misleading name and address. The penalty is 5 penalty units (s 24).

• Hindering or obstructing an authorised officer. A person must not, without reasonable excuse, hinder or obstruct an authorised officer acting in the course of exercising powers or functions under the Act. The penalty is 10 penalty units (s 25).

The Act states penalties in penalty units. The monetary value of a penalty unit is governed by other statutory instruments and is not specified in the text reproduced here. Practitioners must therefore consult the relevant penalty unit value current at the time of offence to calculate the financial penalty.

Enforcement powers and procedures

• Directions and removals. Authorised officers may direct persons to leave or not enter if necessary for good order and security (s 16(1)). They may remove persons from the precincts, prevent entry or re-entry and use no more force than reasonably necessary in doing so (s 19(1)-(2)). Removal powers may only be used where the authorised officer believes on reasonable grounds that the person failed to comply with a direction or committed or attempted to commit an offence (s 19(3)).

• Arrest without warrant. An authorised officer may, without warrant, arrest a person in the precincts if the authorised officer reasonably believes the person has committed an offence against s 22 or s 23 (failure to leave when directed or entering/re-entering contrary to direction) (s 21(1)). If a police or protective services officer effects an arrest, they must as soon as practicable bring the person before the Magistrates' Court (s 21(2)). Where an authorised officer who is not a police or protective services officer arrests, they may detain in a suitable place until handing custody to police, must inform the detainee of reasons and notify police and request assistance as soon as practicable (s 21(3)-(5)).

• Prosecution. Proceedings for an offence under the Act may be taken by an authorised officer (s 26). That means the statutory category of authorised officers is empowered to initiate prosecutions under the Act rather than that task being restricted to public prosecutors.

Evidentiary aids in enforcement and litigation

• Certificates. A presiding officer or the named parliamentary officers may issue certificates which purport to state that a police or protective services officer was authorised under an MOU and whether a condition or direction applied; courts must take judicial notice of the signature and absent contrary evidence the certificate is proof of the matters stated (s 13). Separately, a presiding officer’s certificate that a person is an authorised officer or that a direction under s 15 had or had not been given is evidence and proof of those matters, with judicial notice of signature required (s 27).

Interaction between presiding-officer direction and police actions

• Direction to authorised officers. A presiding officer may direct an authorised officer not to exercise or to cease the exercise of any power or function under Part 3, and such direction does not invalidate prior acts done before the direction (s 15(1), (3)). However, presiding officers cannot direct a police or protective services officer to exercise a power (s 15(2)). This creates a supervisory role for presiding officers over authorised non-police actors, while preserving the operational discretion of police to exercise their powers.

Practical enforcement implications

• Time limits and notices. Directions to leave or not enter can be for a period of up to 7 days (s 16(3)); if unspecified, the direction lasts 24 hours (s 16(4)). A presiding officer may extend exclusions by written notice while the direction applies (s 16(5)-(6)). Service methods include personal service or by post for written notices (s 16(6)).

• Use of force constraints. Where removal or detention occurs, the Act conditions the use of force on it being no more than reasonably necessary (s 19(2)), mirroring common law constraints.

Taken together, the Act provides a suite of summary enforcement tools for maintaining security in the precincts including short-term exclusion, removal and arrest without warrant for specified contraventions, with penalties expressed in penalty units and evidentiary certificates to streamline proof in prosecutions (ss 16-27).

The Act contains multiple express cross-references and non-derogation clauses which position it in relation to other statutes and existing powers.

Express non-derogation and preservation

• Parliamentary privileges and existing powers. Section 4 declares that nothing in the Act derogates from privileges, immunities and powers held by Parliament, the Houses, presiding officers, members, committees, and parliamentary staff. Section 14(2) similarly preserves powers existing otherwise than by this Act for removing members or preventing their entry. These provisions mean the Act is meant to overlay the constitutional and parliamentary regime without displacing pre-existing privileges and internal parliamentary powers (s 4; s 14(2)).

Specific statutory overrides and cross-references

• Land and Crown reserves law. Part 2 is made to operate despite anything to the contrary in the Land Act 1958 and the Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978 (s 5(1)). This prioritises the statutory precinct-declaration and management regime over inconsistent provisions in those Acts for land that becomes part of the precincts under s 6. The Parliamentary reserve itself was permanently reserved under the Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978 and remains described in the Schedule and s 3.

• Cross-reference to Constitution Act. The Act defines the presiding officer by reference to the meaning given in the Constitution Act 1975 (s 3). That cross-reference aligns the roles and identities of presiding officers to their constitutional definitions.

• Police and protective services definitions. Following amendment in 2014, the Act uses the definition of police officer and protective services officer as in the Victoria Police Act 2013 (s 3). This ties enforcement personnel under the Act to the statutory definitions and functions in the Victoria Police Act, and the 2014 amendment also modified related provisions (see Table of Amendments).

• Non-exclusion of other arrest powers. Section 21(6) clarifies that nothing in the section prevents arrest under any other law. That preserves the general law and other statutory arrest powers in addition to the specific s 21 arrest power.

Evidentiary interface

• Certificates and judicial notice. The Act requires courts to take judicial notice of signatures on certain certificates by presiding officers and specified parliamentary officers and provides that those certificates are evidence and, absent contrary proof, are accepted as proof of matters such as whether an MOU authorised a function or whether a direction under s 15 had been given (ss 13, 27). This interacts with normal criminal procedure and evidence law by creating a statutory short-cut for proofs concerning authorisation and direction.

Administrative interface

• House Committee duties preserved. Section 5(2) states that nothing in Part 2 affects the duties or functions of the House Committee under the Parliamentary Committees Act 2003, whether given under that Act or otherwise. This preserves committee roles established by other parliamentary statute.

Limits on disposal of reserved land

• Section 9(4) explicitly prevents the exercise of powers under s 9 from permitting mortgage, sale or disposal of any part of the Parliamentary reserve. This interacts with Crown land management law and confirms that while leases and licences may be granted under s 9, the reserve’s fundamental status remains protected.

Amendment history interaction

• The Act has been amended by later statutes which themselves interact with other Acts. For example, the 2014 Victoria Police Amendment (Consequential and Other Matters) Act 2014 made multiple changes to incorporate Victoria Police Act 2013 definitions and to adjust provisions about police and PSO powers and procedural rules (Table of Amendments). The Parks and Crown Land Legislation Amendment Act 2017 updated the Parliamentary reserve definition (s 3).

Operational ambiguity and legal layering

• The Act creates a statutory enforcement layer for precinct security which sits alongside common law police powers, the Victoria Police Act, parliamentary rules and privileges, and Crown land law. Practitioners must therefore assess the applicable power in any given fact pattern: whether an action falls under Part 3 enforcement, under an MOU, under general police powers, under parliamentary internal procedures, or under Crown land controls (s 11(3); s 14(2); s 21(6); s 5(1)).

In sum, the Act does not operate in isolation. Its operative provisions expressly preserve parliamentary privileges, defer to constitutional definitions, incorporate police definitions from the Victoria Police Act, operate notwithstanding certain Crown-land statutes, and create evidentiary devices that interface with criminal procedure and evidence law (s 4; s 3; s 5; ss 11-13; ss 21, 27). Legal advisers should map each operational decision to the relevant statutory source and the preserved external powers.

The Act in the provided version incorporates several amendments listed in the endnotes and Table of Amendments. The endnotes state the Act as incorporating amendments as at 15 December 2017. Relevant amendments and their mechanical effects are as follows.

• Parliamentary Committees Act 2003, No. 110/2003. Assent 9 December 2003, commencement s 61 on 10 December 2003. The 2003 amendment affected Pt 4 headings and sections 28-30 which were subsequently repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act 2007. Section 5(2) was amended by this Act to preserve duties or functions of the House Committee (s 5(2) as amended by No. 110/2003 s 61(1)).

• Statute Law Revision Act 2007, No. 28/2007. Assent 26 June 2007, commencement 27 June 2007. The 2007 Act amended Pt 4 heading and sections 28-30 and then repealed them (Pt 4 repealed by No. 28/2007 s 3(Sch item 50)). The endnotes record Pt 4 as amended and then repealed.

• Victoria Police Amendment (Consequential and Other Matters) Act 2014, No. 37/2014. Assent 3 June 2014, commencement 1 July 2014 for s 10(Schedule item 122). The 2014 Act made multiple targeted amendments to this Act. The endnotes indicate specific schedule items inserted or updated definitions and provisions: the definition of authorised officer was amended by No. 37/2014 s 10(Sch item 122.1(b)); police officer definition inserted by No. 37/2014 s 10(Sch item 122.1(a)); protective services officer definition substituted by No. 37/2014 s 10(Sch item 122.1(c)); s 11(2)(a) amended by No. 37/2014 s 10(Sch item 122.2(a)); s 11(3) amended by No. 37/2014 s 10(Sch item 122.2(b)); s 12(1) amended by No. 37/2014 s 10(Sch item 122.3(a)); s 12(2) amended by No. 37/2014 s 10(Sch item 122.3(b)); s 13(1) amended by No. 37/2014 s 10(Sch item 122.4); s 15(1) and (2) amended by No. 37/2014 s 10(Sch item 122.5); s 21(2)-(5) amended by No. 37/2014 s 10(Sch item 122.5). These amendments align definitions and procedural clauses with the Victoria Police Act 2013 and adjust the interplay between police, protective services officers and presiding officers.

• Parks and Crown Land Legislation Amendment Act 2017, No. 53/2017. Assent 24 October 2017, commencement s 87 on 15 December 2017. The Amendment updated the definition of Parliamentary reserve in s 3 (s 3 def of Parliamentary reserve amended by No. 53/2017 s 87), reflecting an updated plan or administrative re-description of the reserved land. The endnotes record commencement and citation details.

Other endnote material

• The Act’s long title when introduced was wider than the final short title suggests; the Minister’s second reading speech and the long title referred to amendments and repeals to other Acts such as the Unlawful Assemblies and Processions Act 1958 and amendments to the Parliamentary Committees Act 1968 and the Road Safety Act 1986. The final Act as printed focuses on precinct control, management and security and on related matters (Endnotes).

• The Table of Amendments in the endnotes summarises the Acts that altered the Parliamentary Precincts Act and the commencement dates for the relevant amendment provisions. The 2014 amendments commenced via a Special Gazette on 24 June 2014 for s 10(Schedule item 122).

No amendments are listed in the endnotes as "Not in Operation" as at the publication date. The endnotes include general legislative interpretation notes about headings, examples, diagrams and other non-operational matters which do not form part of the operative text of the Act but explain style changes under the Interpretation of Legislation Act 1984.

For legal practice, the practical significance of the amendments is concentrated in the 2014 changes aligning police and PSO definitions and their procedural interplay with presiding officers, and the 2017 update to the Parliamentary reserve definition. The 2003 and 2007 amendments adjusted committee-related provisions and removed certain parts subsequently repealed.

The text provided contains no reported or cited case law and does not list any litigation under the Act. The endnotes do not cite judicial determinations about the Act. Therefore, within the source material available for this analysis there are no named judicial authorities or reported cases interpreting these provisions.

Two related evidentiary features may nevertheless have attracted litigation in practice, though no cases are named here. The Act creates statutory certificates that courts must take judicial notice of and which are, absent contrary evidence, proof of matters stated in the certificates (ss 13(1)-(2), 27(1)-(2)). In practice, such certificates are likely to be litigated where a defendant challenges the factual basis of a direction or a claimed authorisation under an MOU. The statute builds a legislative evidentiary presumption, but the text here provides no authority or judicial dissection of how courts have applied the presumption or how courts weigh contrary evidence.

Practitioners seeking litigation authorities must consult case law databases, as the printed Act and its endnotes do not supply litigation history. Absent named cases in the source, no jurisdictional or interpretive precedents can be cited from this material.

The Act contains several technical features and procedural traps that carry practical consequences. These are not evaluative observations but statutory mechanics that commonly produce compliance or litigation issues.

• Time limits and extensions for directions. A direction to leave or not to enter can be for up to 7 days (s 16(3)). If no period is specified the direction lasts 24 hours (s 16(4)). While an authorised officer may give the initial direction, a presiding officer may give a written further direction extending the exclusion during the period of the initial direction without the person needing to seek leave (s 16(5)). The extension must be served personally or by post (s 16(6)). Practitioners should note that an oral direction without a specified period can become a short 24-hour exclusion unless followed by written extension.

• Oral directions and deemed service to groups. Oral directions are valid means of exclusion and are deemed to be given to each member of a group if delivered in a manner likely to be audible to all or as many as reasonably practicable (s 18(2)). This creates immediate operational effect for assemblies where one oral direction can incriminate multiple individuals for non-compliance under s 22 or s 23.

• Identity enquiry preconditions with criminal notice. Before requiring a person to give name and address under s 20, the authorised officer must identify themselves and inform the person that the officer believes an offence has occurred, and that refusal or misleading details is an offence (s 20(2)(a)-(c)). Failure to comply with these preconditions may be relied on as a procedural defence in prosecutions under s 24.

• Certificates create prima facie proof. Certificates signed by presiding officers and certain parliamentary officers as to MOU authorisation or whether a direction under s 15 was given are, in absence of contrary evidence, proof of the matters stated and courts must take judicial notice of signatures (ss 13(1)-(2), 27(1)-(2)). This shifts the evidentiary burden onto a defendant to produce contrary evidence rather than requiring the prosecution to prove the authorisation facts from scratch.

• Police MOU compliance: obligation but not invalidation. Section 12(1) requires police or protective services officers to comply with MOU conditions and directions. However, s 12(2) says that failure to comply does not invalidate the action taken by the officer in purported exercise of the function. That means procedural or compliance failures with MOU terms are not automatically fatal to the legality of police action, which can complicate remedies and lead to factual disputes about state responsibility.

• Presiding officers can curtail authorised-officer exercise but cannot tell police to act. A presiding officer may direct an authorised officer not to exercise or to cease exercise of a power under Part 3 (s 15(1)), but s 15(2) expressly prohibits presiding officers from directing a police or protective services officer to exercise a power. This distinction can create operational friction where presiding officers seek to control responses but lack power to compel police action.

• Limits on delegation. Presiding officers may delegate powers to certain parliamentary officers but not the powers to grant leases or licences under s 9(2)-(3), not certain security supervisory powers under s 15, not s 16(5) extension power, and not the delegation power itself (s 10). If a presiding officer attempts an invalid delegation of a non-delegable power, challenges may arise as to the validity of the action taken.

• Member protections. Part 3 does not authorise directions, removals or prevention of members entering the precincts (s 14(1)). However, s 14(2) preserves other powers existing outside the Act that may allow removal or directions against members. Practitioners must therefore evaluate whether an action targeting a member is governed by the Act or by other parliamentary powers.

• Penalty unit valuation not specified. The Act specifies penalties in penalty units but does not provide their monetary equivalent. Advisers must check the current value of a penalty unit under the applicable law to determine the fine amount.

• Orders and revocations require presiding-officer recommendation. Governor in Council orders creating or revoking precinct declarations must be made on recommendation of either or both presiding officers (ss 6(1), 7(1)). Property owners and occupiers may not be able to defeat or independently alter such orders, given the statutory procedure.

• Interaction with other arrest powers. Section 21(6) clarifies that s 21 does not prevent arrest under any other law. Practitioners must consider whether police are acting under s 21 or under another statutory or common-law arrest power, as different procedural obligations and consequences may follow.

These “gotchas” are mechanical rather than normative. They focus attention on evidentiary dynamics, delegation limits, interplay between presiding officers and police, oral-direction mechanics, identity procedure, and the effect of certificates and MOUs. Each can affect strategy for compliance, protest planning, contesting prosecutions and negotiating operational responses.

Compliance requires mapping roles to statutory duties and following specified procedural steps. The following are practical, source-grounded steps for different actors.

For presiding officers and parliamentary managers

• Document and record all precinct-declaration recommendations and Governor in Council orders. Orders bring land into the precincts (s 6(1)-(3)); records should include the recommendation, the stated purpose (required by s 6(2) that the presiding officer be satisfied the land is required for parliamentary purposes), and the revocation date if any (s 6(3)).

• Use written instruments for leases, licences and agreements and ensure terms are set out under s 9(3). Do not attempt to mortgage, sell or dispose of the Parliamentary reserve as s 9(4) prohibits this.

• Maintain clear delegation instruments. Where delegating powers under s 10, ensure the instrument does not attempt to delegate non-delegable powers listed in s 10(a)-(d) and that delegates are the officers specified in s 10(e)-(j).

• Negotiate and maintain MOUs with the Chief Commissioner of Police. Ensure MOUs explicitly set out the scope of police and protective services officers’ functions, any conditions and directions about manner of exercise, and procedures for amendment and revocation (s 11(1)-(5)). Keep signed MOUs and records accessible because s 13 certificates about MOU authorisation can be used in prosecutions.

For police and protective services officers

• Comply with MOU conditions and directions. Section 12(1) creates a duty to comply. Even if a failure does not per se invalidate action (s 12(2)), compliance reduces legal risk and supports operational legitimacy in prosecutions and reviews.

• Follow arrest and detention procedures under s 21. Where arrest is effected under s 21 by a police or protective services officer, bring the person before the Magistrates' Court as soon as practicable (s 21(2)). If detaining on behalf of a non-police authorised officer, accept handover promptly and document attempts to notify and assist (s 21(3)-(5)).

For authorised non-police officers (Usher, Serjeant-at-Arms, Clerks)

• Before giving oral directions when not in uniform or ceremonial dress, state your name and position as required by s 18(3). Before requiring name and address under s 20, state your own name and position and inform the person of the belief about an offence and that refusal or misleading information are offences (s 20(2)(a)-(c)).

• Use written notices where appropriate. Written exclusions are easier to validate and service is prescribed for presiding-officer written notices under s 16(6).

• Exercise removal powers only where you can reasonably ground belief that the person failed to comply with a direction or committed/attempted an offence (s 19(3)). Use no more force than reasonably necessary (s 19(2)) and document reasons for belief and steps taken to notify police.

For members of the public, protest organisers, visitors, lessees and contractors

• Observe directions to leave or not enter. Directions are lawful where an authorised officer believes on reasonable grounds they are necessary for good order and security (s 16(1)). Failure to comply is an offence with a penalty of 10 penalty units (s 22).

• If asked to provide name and address, comply once the authorised officer has complied with the s 20 preconditions, otherwise challenge the procedural compliance during any later prosecution (s 20(2)).

• If excluded by oral direction as part of an assembly, treat that oral direction as applying to all who were reasonably able to hear it under s 18(2).

• Avoid re-entering the precincts during the exclusion period. The default is 24 hours absent a specified period (s 16(4)); the initial direction may be extended by written notice from a presiding officer during the initial period (s 16(5)-(6)). Re-entry contrary to such directions is an offence attracting 10 penalty units (s 23).

For lessees, licencees and entities negotiating works

• Expect terms to be set by presiding officers under s 9(3). Leases and licences are subject to conditions determined by the presiding officers and cannot include sale or mortgage of the reserve (s 9(4)). Ensure contractual documentation aligns with the presiding-officer-determined terms.

For prosecutors and legal advisers

• Use s 13 and s 27 certificates strategically. Certificates signed by presiding officers as to MOU authorisation or as to whether a direction was given are treated as proof unless contradicted. Obtain those certificates early and anticipate challenges seeking to rebut them (ss 13, 27).

• Pay attention to the interplay between MOU terms and general police powers. Even where police fail to comply with an MOU, s 12(2) states that failure does not invalidate action; legal advice should consider other bases for challenge such as excess of statutory power or proportionality in the use of force.

Recordkeeping and review

• Maintain contemporaneous records of directions, names of authorised officers who gave directions, reasons on reasonable grounds for directions or removals, and any service documents for written notices. The Act’s procedural hooks and the evidentiary weight of certificates make contemporaneous documentation probative in prosecutions and reviews.

• Regularly review the MOU with police, especially after incidents or changes in policing legislation, because s 11(5) permits amendment at any time by agreement between presiding officers and the Chief Commissioner of Police.

In all scenarios, compliance requires following the Act’s procedural prescriptions precisely: stating name and position where required (s 18(3), s 20(2)(a)), respecting time limits and service requirements for exclusions (s 16(3)-(6)), using force only as reasonably necessary (s 19(2)), and documenting authorisations and MOUs (ss 11-13).