2013
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF THE
NORTHERN TERRITORY

ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND MINISTER FOR JUSTICE
CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT (CHEATING AT GAMBLING) BILL 2013
SERIAL NO. 29

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

GENERAL OUTLINE
The purpose of the Bill is to insert specific new offences for match-fixing and betting fraud in the Criminal Code. The offences relate to corrupting the betting outcome of events and event contingencies on which it is lawful to place bets.
The Bill implements a key objective of the National Policy on Match-Fixing in Sport which was agreed to by all Australian Governments on 10 June 2011, to pursue a nationally consistent approach to criminal offences in relation to match fixing and cheating at gambling. The new offences contained in the Bill are consistent with those enacted in the New South Wales Crimes Amendment (Cheating at Gambling) Act 2012 and match-fixing behaviours agreed to by the Standing Council on Law and Justice at its meeting on 18 November 2011.

NOTES ON CLAUSES
Part 1			Preliminary Matters
Clause 1.	Short Title.
This is a formal clause which provides for the citation of the Bill.  The Bill when passed may be cited as the Criminal Code Amendment (Cheating at Gambling) Act 2013.
Clause 2.	Commencement.
The Act will commence on a day fixed by the Administrator by Gazette notice.
Part 2	Amendment of Criminal Code Act
Clause 3.	Criminal Code Amended
The Bill once enacted will amend the Criminal Code.
Clause 4	Section 1 amended
 (1) This clause amends section 1 of the Criminal Code to insert the following terms and refers to the relevant section in Part VII, Division 5A for their definition:
‘agreement about conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event’
‘bet’
‘cause a financial disadvantage’ 
‘conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event’
‘encourage’
‘event’
‘event contingency’
‘obtain a financial advantage’ 
(2) This clause also amends the existing definition of ‘event’ in section 1 of the Criminal Code so that it does not apply to Part VII, Division 5A which is a new Division created by this Bill to insert the match-fixing offences. The definition of event in section 1 of the Criminal Code will now state that ‘event, except for Part VII, Division 5A, means the result of an act or omission’. An event for the purposes of Part VII, Division 5A will be defined in that Division.

Clause 5	Part VII, Division 5A inserted
This clause inserts the new Division 5A Cheating at Gambling in 
Part VII of the Criminal Code.
Subdivision 1 Preliminary matters includes new sections 237A to 237G which define words and expressions used in new Division 5A and also deals with proof of intention to obtain a financial advantage or cause financial disadvantage.
Section 237A lists the following terms and refers to the section containing their definition.
‘agreement about conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event’ is defined in section 237B(2)
‘bet’ is defined in section 237C(1)
‘cause’ (a financial disadvantage) is defined in section 237E(2)
‘conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event’ is defined in section 237B(1)
‘encourage’ is defined in section 237G
‘event’ is defined in section 237D(1)
‘event contingency’ is defined in section 237D(2) and
‘obtain a financial advantage’ is defined in section 237E(1).
Section 237B defines the term ‘corrupts a betting outcome of an event’. 
Section 237B(1) states that conduct corrupts the betting outcome of an event if the conduct: 
(a)	affects or, if engaged in, would be likely to affect the outcome of any type of betting on the event; and
(b)	is contrary to the standards of integrity that a reasonable person would expect of persons in a position to affect the outcome of any type of betting on the event.
This is a phrase that is integral to the new offences. It establishes that there must be a link between the conduct and the outcome of the betting and it is conduct that is corrupt according to an objective standard. This definition will preclude conduct that might affect the outcome of betting, but which is appropriate conduct, being caught by the offences. For example, strategic or tactical decisions made during an event, honest errors and spontaneous breaches of rules resulting in penalties by players may affect a betting outcome but would not be considered contrary to the standards of integrity that a reasonable person would expect of a person in their position. 
Section 237B(2) defines an ‘agreement about conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event’. This type of agreement is one between two or more persons under which one or more of those persons agree to engage in conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event.
Section 237C defines betting and the conduct that this covers includes placing, accepting or withdrawing a bet or causing a bet to be placed, accepted or withdrawn.
This section also states that where the Bill refers to betting on an event it also includes betting on an event contingency.
Section 237D defines ‘event’ and ‘event contingency’. 
An ‘event’ means any event (whether it takes place in the Territory or elsewhere) on which it is lawful to bet under a law of the Territory, or the law of another Territory or State or the Commonwealth. This is not limited to sporting events and would include, for example, betting on an election outcome or Academy Award winners. This also means that a person in the Northern Territory who places a bet on an event in respect of which it is lawful to bet on in New South Wales may be prosecuted if he or she is committing one of the new offences in this Bill.
An ‘event contingency’ means any contingency:
(a)	that is connected in any way with an event: and
(b)	on which it is lawful to bet under a law of the Territory, a State or another Territory or the Commonwealth.
This could include, for example, betting on which team or player scores first in a football match.
Section 237E defines the term ‘obtaining a financial advantage’ and ‘causing a financial disadvantage’. 
Ssection 237E(1) specifies that obtaining a financial advantage includes obtaining that advantage for oneself or another person, inducing a third person to do something that results in oneself or another person obtaining financial advantage and also includes keeping a financial advantage that one has. The financial advantage can be temporary or permanent.
Subsection 237E(2) specifies that ‘causing a financial disadvantage’ can be causing a disadvantage to another person, or can be inducing a third person to do something that results in another person suffering financial disadvantage. The subsection also specifies that the financial disadvantage can be temporary or permanent. 
Section 237F deals with proving an intention to obtain financial advantage or to cause financial disadvantage. 
This section provides that where an offence under this Division requires proof that a person intended to obtain a financial advantage or to cause a financial disadvantage, that element of the offence is established if (and only if) it is proved that the accused either (a) meant to obtain a financial advantage or cause a financial disadvantage in connection with betting on an event, or (b) was aware that another person meant to obtain a financial advantage or cause a financial disadvantage as a result of the conduct the subject of the charge. Subsection (3) clarifies that the result of the ‘conduct the subject of the charge’ in (b) means the result of the prohibited conduct in the offences in section 237H, 237J or 237K.
Subsection (2) further provides that it is not necessary to prove that any financial advantage was actually obtained or financial disadvantage was actually caused.
Section 237G defines ‘encouraging another person to engage in conduct’ for the purposes of Division 5A to include command, request, propose, advise, incite, induce, persuade, authorise, urge, threaten or place pressure on the person to engage in the relevant conduct.
Subdivision 2 Offences 
This subdivision creates the five new crimes that target conduct that is intended to corrupt betting outcomes.
Section 237H creates the crime of engaging in conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event. 
This offence requires proof that a person engaged in conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event and did so with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage or causing a financial disadvantage in connection with any betting on the event.  The default fault elements in section 43AM of the Criminal Code apply to the physical elements of the offence. This means that the fault elements are intentional conduct, reckless as to whether the conduct corrupts the betting outcome of an event. The accused must also have engaged in the conduct with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage or causing financial disadvantage, proof of which is outlined in section 237F.
This section should be read together with section 237B which defines ‘corrupts a betting outcome of an event’, and section 237E which defines ‘obtaining a financial advantage’ and ‘causing a financial disadvantage’. 
The maximum penalty for this offence is 7 years imprisonment.
Section 237J creates the crimes of facilitating conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event. 
Subsection 237J(1) creates the crime of offering to engage in conduct that corrupts the outcome of the event with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage or causing a financial disadvantage, in connection with any betting on the event.
Subsection 237J(2) creates the crime of encouraging another person to engage in conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage or causing a financial disadvantage, in connection with any betting on the event.
Subsection (3) creates the crime of entering into an agreement about conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage or causing a financial disadvantage, in connection with any betting on the event.
These offences rely on the default fault elements in section 43AM of the Criminal Code. Therefore the fault elements are intentionally engages in the relevant conduct, reckless as to whether the conduct corrupts a betting outcome of an event. The accused must also have engaged in the relevant conduct with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage or causing a financial disadvantage, proof of which is outlined in section 237F.
This section should be read together with section 237B which defines ‘corrupts a betting outcome of an event’, section 237E which defines ‘obtaining a financial advantage’ and ‘causing a financial disadvantage’ and section 237G which defines ‘encourage’. 
The maximum penalty for these offences is 7 years imprisonment.
Section 237K creates the crime of concealing conduct or an agreement about conduct that corrupts a betting outcome of an event. 
This offence requires proof that a person encouraged another person to conceal conduct, or an agreement about conduct, that corrupts the betting outcome of an event, from any appropriate authority and did so with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage or causing a financial disadvantage in connection with any betting on the event. 
This offence relies on the default fault elements in section 43AM of the Criminal Code. Therefore the fault elements are the person intentionally encourages another person to conceal conduct or an agreement about conduct, reckless as to whether the conduct corrupts the betting outcome of an event. The accused also had to encourage the other person with the intention of obtaining a financial advantage or of causing a financial disadvantage.
The term ‘encourage’ is defined at section 237G. Section 237KJ(2) defines ‘appropriate authority’ to include a police officer or a body that has the official function of controlling, regulating or supervising an event or any betting on an event. 
The maximum penalty for this offence is 7 years.
Section 237L creates the crime of use of corrupt conduct information for betting purposes. 
This offence requires proof that a person possessed corrupt conduct information in connection to an event and bet on the event, encouraged another person to bet on the event in a particular way, or communicated the information to another person who the person knew or ought reasonably to have known would or would be likely to bet on the event. It is not necessary to prove that the person encouraged to bet or to whom information was communicated, did actually bet on the event concerned. 
This offence relies on the default fault elements in section 43AM of the Criminal Code. Therefore the fault elements are that the accused intentionally possessed information, reckless as to whether the information is corrupt conduct information, and the accused also intentionally engaged in any of the conduct in 237K(1) (a),(b) or (c), namely betting, encouraging another to bet or communicating the information to another person.
Section 237L(2) provides that information is corrupt conduct information if the information is about conduct, or proposed conduct, that corrupts a betting outcome of an event. The term ‘corrupts a betting outcome of an event’ is defined  in section 237B.
Section 237L(3) provides that in proceedings for an offence involving encouraging another person to bet or communicating the information to another, it is not necessary to show that the person encouraged or communicated to actually bet on the event.
The maximum penalty for this offence is 7 years imprisonment.
Section 237M creates the summary offence of use of inside information for betting purposes. 
This offence requires proof that a person possessed inside information in connection with an event and bet on the event, encouraged another person to bet on the event in a particular way, or communicated the information to another person who the person knew or ought reasonably to have known would or would be likely to bet on the event. 
This offence relies on the default fault elements in section 43AM of the Criminal Code. Therefore the fault elements are that the accused intentionally possessed information, reckless as to whether the information is inside information, and the accused also intentionally engaged in any of the conduct in 237L(1) (a),(b) or (c).
Section 237M(2) provides that information is ‘inside information’ if the information is not generally available and, if it were generally available, would or would be likely to influence persons who commonly bet on the event in deciding whether or not to bet on the event or in making any other betting decision. 
Information is defined in subsection (4) to be ‘generally available’ if it consists of matter readily observable to the public, or has been made known in a manner that would likely bring it to the attention of the public. The definition also includes information that consists of deductions, conclusions or inferences made or drawn from information readily observable to the public or from information made known in a manner that would likely bring it to the attention of the public. 
Section 237M(4) provides that it is not necessary to prove that the person encouraged to bet, or to whom information was communicated, did actually bet on the event concerned. 
The maximum penalty for this offence is two years imprisonment.
Section 237N is an alternative verdict clause. It provides that where a person is tried for the offence of using corrupt conduct information for betting purposes under section 237L and the court is not satisfied that the person is guilty of this offence, the court may find the person guilty of the offence of the use of inside information for betting purposes under section 237M as an alternative verdict.
Clause 6	Schedule 1 amended
This clause inserts Part VII (Property Offences and Related Matters), Division 5A (Cheating at Gambling) into Schedule 1 of the Criminal Code. This schedule lists the offences to which the criminal responsibility provisions of Part IIAA of the Criminal Code apply.