34Supreme Court may make continuing detention orders against eligible offenders if unacceptable risk

#### 34 Supreme Court may make continuing detention orders against eligible offenders if unacceptable risk 34 Supreme Court may make continuing detention orders against eligible offenders if unacceptable risk > > (1) The Supreme Court may make an order for the continued detention of an eligible offender (called a continuing detention order) if— > > > > > (a) the offender is a detained offender or supervised offender (or was a detained offender or supervised offender at the time the original application for the order was filed), and > > > > > (b) an application for the order is made in accordance with this Part, and > > > > > (c) the Supreme Court is satisfied that the offender is any of the following— > > > > > > > (i) a convicted NSW terrorist offender, > > > > > > > (ii) a convicted NSW underlying terrorism offender, > > > > > > > (iii) a convicted NSW terrorism activity offender, and > > > > > (d) the Supreme Court is satisfied to a high degree of probability that the offender poses an unacceptable risk of committing a serious terrorism offence if not kept in detention under the order. > > > (2) However, the Supreme Court must not make a continuing detention order in respect of a supervised offender who is under an extended supervision order or an interim supervision order that has not been suspended (the existing supervision order) unless— > > > > > (a) the offender has been found guilty of an offence under section 30 in respect of the existing supervision order, or > > > > > (b) the Supreme Court is satisfied that the offender poses an unacceptable risk of committing a serious terrorism offence if a continuing detention order is not made because of altered circumstances since the making of the existing supervision order. > > > (3) Without limiting the matters that the Supreme Court may take into account for the purposes of subsection (2) (b), the Court may take into account the failure to comply, or an allegation that the supervised offender has failed to comply, with any requirement of an existing supervision order. > > **s 34:** Am 2018 No 29, Sch 1.22 \[7\].