Annual Report 2012-2013 page 76

6. It is not a legitimate forensic tactic for the prosecution to engage in “trial by ambush” and there is a general duty to disclose the whole of the prosecution case to counsel for the accused. This duty is subject only to any overriding demands of justice such as the need to prevent risk to the lives or safety of potential witnesses. Even then it will usually be possible to apprise the defence of the general nature of the Crown case even if such details as the names and addresses of particular witnesses are withheld.

7. Where prosecuting counsel knows that a witness for the Crown has prior convictions and/or has been given an undertaking pursuant to section 9 of the Act the material facts should be revealed to the defence if it appears to the prosecutor that they could be of material significance in the trial.

8. In determining whether or not to call a particular witness the prosecutor presenting the case must pay due regard to the need to be fair to the accused. In general, it is the duty of the prosecution to call all witnesses capable of giving evidence relevant to the guilt or innocence of the accused. It is only in rare circumstances that the prosecution would be justified in concluding that the overriding interests of justice require that such a witness not be called. Where the prosecutor makes a bona fide assessment on reasonable grounds that the evidence in question would be unreliable the defence should be informed at the earliest possible time of the decision not to call that evidence. Even then all practicable steps should be taken to enable the defence to tender the evidence if desired. In particular, the defence should be informed of the existence, identity and whereabouts, if known, of any witness who is not to be called in the prosecution case but whose evidence may be relevant to the case, which the defence may wish to adduce.

9. Since the court has a discretion to exclude otherwise admissible evidence on the ground that it was illegally or improperly obtained prosecuting counsel will generally be obliged to inform defence counsel of any evidence which appears to fall into that category. This principle is enshrined in the rules of the New South Wales Bar Association.

“Where in criminal proceedings a barrister appearing for the prosecution reasonably believes that a document or record included in his brief or instructions may have been unlawfully obtained, he shall, in the interests of justice:

1. Inform his or her opponent of the intention to use such document or record; and/or
2. Make a copy of such document or record available to his or her opponent.

(Rule 57)

In the Australian Capital Territory a prosecuting counsel should, in addition, inform defence counsel of the reason for his belief that the document may have been unlawfully obtained unless that reason should be readily apparent to the defence.

10. Where prosecuting counsel are entitled to cross-examine an accused as to his or her credit or motive they must ensure that such an exercise is carried out fairly. In particular, accusations should not be put to an accused unless based on information, which appears to be accurate, and unless they are justified in the circumstances of the case.