Who Can Hold Accountable Under Law After Daming Report To Dreamworld Tragedy?
McDougall wrote “that there is not any proof Dreamworld conducted a suitable risk assessment from the thirty decades of operation of this ride” and the security systems in place were “frighteningly unsophisticated”.
His judgment has been damning for the business: All these failings, he said, led to the deaths of those four victims. This is a record which pulls no punches.
Former Ardent Leisure CEO Deborah Thomas responded instantly, stating the findings have been “a significant landmark in the extensive and continuing investigation” to the deaths and she expected that the recommendations will stop such a tragedy happening again.
Fees Under Workplace Laws
In such instances, prosecutions are more inclined to be based on office laws made for this particular function.
Nonetheless, it isn’t the function of coroners to put charges they just put their findings prior to the applicable government for consideration.
A famous case in point is that a coroner’s unequivocal discovering in 1999 which Domenic Perre had left and delivered a parcel bomb into the Adelaide office of the National Crime Authority that murdered a police officers in March 1994. Twenty decades after, Perre was committed to stand trial on a charge of murder as a consequence of succeeding police enquiries to the detective’s departure.
He called on the Queensland Office of Industrial Relations to contemplate prosecutions from Ardent Leisure.
These office laws are made to protect all men and women who fall below a duty of care in and around offices, whether they’re visitors or employees.
Under Queensland’s action, an offence was committed if measures aren’t taken to prevent a substantial risk from happening, or when there’s a failure to comply with regulatory requirements.
The prosecution must prove its case with the identical standard employed in most criminal matters where motive or reckless indifference are applicable guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Manslaughter Charges Aren’t Effective
Queensland’s parliament passed the legislation in 2017 at the aftermath of the deaths of two employees in the Eagle Farm racecourse at 2016. They have been also no doubt affected by the Dreamworld deaths. These laws make it a ton simpler to sentence business supervisors to jail for deaths at work, even in the absence of the direct culpability.
However, the legislation can’t apply retrospectively. Nevertheless, an integral issue for all those promoting industrial manslaughter legislation is the dearth of proof that scapegoating delinquent business executives following a terrible event is very likely to get rid of dangerous practices.
Putting in place significant resources for injury prevention is a much better use of funds than finding error and sending individuals to short periods of imprisonment weeks, or even years, following a catastrophe occurs.
One other important deterrent against these senseless tragedies happening again is that the real heartache of these executives on peak of any irresponsible business, and the danger of reputational harm to them and their business brand.
That reminder has to be sheeted home to all businesses and companies, not only those providing leisure and theme park amusement. There’s an significant part in this respect for people who train company leaders and people who govern their own affairs.
No amount of legal treatment, clearly, may bring family members. We can only expect every business or company in this nation that has people in its maintenance will learn there’s not any cost which may be placed on their security and safety.
Whether prosecutions move and are successful from the Dreamworld catastrophe, each one of those coroner’s recommendations should be implemented immediately. We owe that much to people who grieve now.