I will simply say, in answer to your question, yes, it would be an additional ground of unconstitutionality.
As far as your other question, if I can just say it briefly so you have time left, when you get to the stage where a finding has been made of dangerousness, you then move to the actual sentencing stage, which is, what do we do with the person? According to the amendments, what we would have then is a further presumption for the indeterminate sentence, unless it can be shown that the individual can be managed in the community. What's not prescribed within the legislation is on what standard one would have to prove that the individual could be managed within the community. Would it be raising a reasonable doubt? Would it be on a balance of probabilities? It doesn't state who has the burden, but obviously it would be the accused because the state would simply like to maintain the presumption once they get to that stage. So that's where the further problem comes in.