Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Regulation 2008
Repealed version for 11 April 2014 to 31 August 2014 (accessed 28 May 2020 at 03:12)
151   Evidence as to use of drugs
(1)  In any proceedings for a correctional centre offence that are being dealt with under the Act by the general manager or a Visiting Magistrate, being proceedings in which it is alleged that an inmate has been under the influence of a drug or that a drug has been present in the inmate’s urine, a certificate signed by an authorised officer to the effect that:
(a)  the correctional officer received a sample of urine obtained in a specified manner, or
(b)  the correctional officer arranged for the sample to be submitted for analysis by a government analyst to determine the presence of any drugs in the inmate’s body or urine, or
(c)  the container was sealed, and marked or labelled, in a specified manner,
is admissible in evidence of the facts so certified.
(2)  In any such proceedings, a certificate signed by a government analyst to the effect that, on a specified day:
(a)  the analyst received for analysis a container holding a sample of urine, or
(b)  the container, when received, was sealed with an unbroken seal, and was marked or labelled in a specified manner, or
(c)  the analyst carried out an analysis of the sample to determine the presence of drugs in the urine, or
(d)  the analyst determined that a specified drug was present or was present to a specified extent in the urine, or
(e)  the analyst was, at the time of the analysis, a government analyst,
is admissible in evidence of the facts so certified.
(3)  In any such proceedings:
(a)  evidence that a government analyst received a container holding a sample of urine, being a container that was marked or labelled to indicate that it held a sample of urine obtained from a specified inmate on a specified day, is evidence that the sample was a sample of urine obtained from that inmate on that day, and
(b)  evidence that the container, when received, was sealed with an unbroken seal is evidence that the sample had not been tampered with before it was received by the government analyst.