AN ACT to amend and reenact subsections 17 and 18 of section 12.1-34-02 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to fair treatment of victims.
House Bill 1061 updates North Dakota’s victim-notification and victim-participation provisions in the criminal justice system. It requires custodial authorities to give registered victims and witnesses prompt notice when a defendant is temporarily, provisionally, or finally released from custody, escapes, or is transferred to work-release, education release, a community residential program, or a mental health facility. The bill also clarifies that unregistered victims must receive the same release notice from the appropriate custodial authority.
The bill further revises the process for victim input in parole and pardon matters. It allows victims to submit written statements for consideration by the parole board, governor, or pardon advisory board, keeps those statements confidential, and permits victims of violent crimes to personally appear at the decision-maker’s discretion. It also requires notice to registered victims about pending review, the final decision, any recommendations from the pardon advisory board, and the date of release or pardon-related action, all within a reasonable time and before release from custody.
HB 1061 amends subsections 17 and 18 of section 12.1-34-02 of the North Dakota Century Code, strengthening and clarifying statutory duties related to victim notification and participation. It affects custodial authorities, the parole board, the governor, the pardon advisory board, and pardon clerks by specifying when and how notice must be provided and by reaffirming confidentiality protections for victim statements and testimony. The practical effect is to reinforce victims’ rights during release, parole, and pardon proceedings and to ensure notice is given before a defendant or prisoner leaves custody.
The bill appears to have been broadly supported and noncontroversial. It passed the House overwhelmingly, 86-2, and the Senate unanimously, 47-0, with no recorded committee transcript opposition in the provided materials. The strong vote margins suggest general agreement that the measure is a routine victims’ rights update rather than a major policy dispute.
No major points of contention are reflected in the available record. The only likely areas for discussion are the scope of required notice, the confidentiality of victim statements, and the discretion given to decision-makers to allow personal appearances by victims of violent crimes. However, the vote totals and lack of recorded debate indicate that any concerns were limited and did not generate significant opposition.