Advocates praise recommendations from Australian sexual violence report but say lack of radical change a ‘missed opportunity'
Advocates have welcomed recommendations from a report into the criminal justice system's treatment of victims of sexual violence as 'incredibly symbolic', but others say the commission's failure to suggest radical change was a 'missed opportunity'.
The Albanese government released the Australian Law Reform Commission's report on justice responses to sexual violence on Thursday, while announcing a $21m package to strengthen support services.
The report, which made 64 recommendations, found 'systemic' barriers prevented victim-survivors from accessing justice, with 92% of women choosing not to go to the police after they were sexually assaulted.
The commission recommended every person who has experienced sexual violence should receive legal advice to help them decide whether to engage with the justice system.
Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email
If they choose to do so, legal advisers should provide support throughout the entire process, including to represent complainants in court when applications are made to subpoena or inspect materials that may contain their personal, sensitive, or confidential information.
However, the review stopped short of recommending victims legal representation throughout a trial.
'At this stage, the ALRC does not consider there is a need to go further. Our recommended targeted representation is in the context of a broad model of legal advice. It is important to promote and protect the complainant's rights while protecting the accused person's right to a fair trial,' the report reads.
In Australia's adversarial system, there is limited ability for complainants to have their own legal counsel. The system consists of two sides – the crown, or prosecutor, and the defence – with a sexual assault complainant categorised as a witness.
New South Wales and Queensland allow sexual assault complainants to be legally represented when challenging defence applications for the disclosure of their counselling notes and other confidential records before the actual criminal trial begins.
Sarah Rosenberg, a victim-survivor and co-founder of online resource With You We Can, welcomed the commission's recommendation to extend a victim-survivor's access to their lawyer in the courtroom but noted it was up to each jurisdiction to adopt it.
'What's the point of only having your armour for a third of the battle? Victims are most vulnerable in the courtroom [when they're] on their own and don't have anyone to advocate for their interests,' she said.
'It is well and truly time that Australia catches up with the rest of the world and I think [these recommendations] have done just that.'
Rosenberg said the recommendation was 'incredibly symbolic' and a 'huge shift to viewing victims as valued participants upon whom the criminal justice system relies to be able to prosecute crime'.
Reflecting on her own case, Rosenberg said while victim-survivors often expected to be retraumatised and treated with a lack of respect during a case, they should not be denied appropriate legal advice from an independent lawyer.
'Everyone should be concerned that our justice system is not fit for purpose,' she said.
In an Australian first, leading victims' advocate Michael O'Connell, in his role as South Australia's inaugural Commissioner for Victims' Rights, was given the power to appoint counsel to assist complainants during criminal proceedings and intervene in cases where their privacy may become compromised.
O'Connell said the commission's decision not to take recommend more sweeping changes was a 'missed opportunity'.
'It's disappointing that the commission was not prepared to recommend radical changes, but at least the incremental change is consistent with the evolution of victims rights,' he said. 'It shifts the operation of our justice system in the right direction.'
Sign up to Breaking News Australia
Get the most important news as it breaks
after newsletter promotion
O'Connell had been calling for complainants to be allowed their own lawyers throughout the entire legal process to 'resolve the underlying inequality in the system'.
'There are currently three interests in the administration of justice. That is, the state, the accused and the victim,' O'Connell said.
'It is fundamentally unfair that the interests of the state are represented by the prosecutor and the accused's interests are represented by legal counsel but the person who did not choose to become a victim has no genuine standing, no equal standing in our criminal justice system.'
At the report's release, the women's minister, Katy Gallagher, acknowledged the justice system can add to the trauma of many victim-survivors.
The government is now considering its response to the report and will need to work with the states and territories.
Three specialist trauma-informed sexual assault legal services in Victoria, WA, and the ACT will receive $19.6m over three years to extend their programs.
This will include trialling new non-legal services recommended by the commission and culturally safe Justice System Navigators, who support people to access any chosen justice pathway.
More than half a million dollars will go to bringing on academics to look into an independent complaints system to seek review of police decisions not to pursue charges and scrutinise supports provided during the police investigation phase.
The commission will also receive $1.2m over two years to extend an advisory group recommending how to implement its report.
'We will continue to work hand in hand with victim-survivors, advocates, and states and territories on the next steps from this report, but this announcement also increases access to services right now,' Gallagher said, 'ensuring women can access more support when they need it'.
Information and support for anyone affected by rape or sexual abuse issues is available from the following organisations. In Australia, support is available at 1800Respect (1800 737 732). and the National Sexual Abuse and Redress Support Service is at 1800 211 028. In the UK, Rape Crisis offers support on 0808 500 2222. In the US, Rainn offers support on 800-656-4673. Other international helplines can be found at ibiblio.org/rcip/internl.html
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
19 hours ago
- The Guardian
Worried about the tax on $3m plus super balances? Here's how you'll survive
Imagine you have $3m in super and have just retired, only to hear that Labor plans to hit you with a new tax. Or perhaps you're worried (dream?) that at some point in the near or distant future you might cross that multi-million-dollar savings threshold. Either way, you might be wondering whether the government's proposal to whack an extra 15% tax on earnings on balances over $3m is going to put a major crimp in your retirement plans. Breathe easy, your annual trips to Europe are safe, as are your smashed avocado brekkies. According to Guardian Australia's analysis, a wealthy Australian retiring with $3m in super today would pay an extra $2,355 in tax. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email And that's from annual retirement income of more than $170,000, based on an estimate from Asic's MoneySmart retirement calculator. In other words, the tax represents barely 1% of your income. If that doesn't make you feel better, then remember that the median full-time salary in Australia is $88,400, according to the ABS, and $72,590 across all employees. So you are making nearly twice the median full-time salary – and those suckers are paying income tax! Well, consider this: The Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia reckons that a single person with a paltry $595,000 in savings can generate a 'comfortable' lifestyle in retirement with $51,807 in income a year. You're making more than three times as much, even after paying Labor's damned extra tax! What's that? You only have $800,000 in savings? Gosh, how sad. (If it makes you feel any better, that's still four times the median super balance among 65-69 year-olds, according to the ATO). Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion Don't worry, though, you won't be paying the proposed extra 15% tax - remember it only starts kicking in on balances over $3m. And anyway, you can still live pretty well on $67,000 a year, tax-free. That all sounds OK for the small-fry with $3m in super. But what about the serious savers with $5m? How much extra tax will they have to suffer in the name of making the super system 'fairer'? Bad news. They could be paying something like an extra $25,000 in tax under the proposed policy, if they earn the average 7.5% annual return in the year. The good news is that they'll still have nearly $270,000 left over to … wait, can a single retiree even spend that much in a year?
The Guardian
4 days ago
- The Guardian
Labor may team up with Coalition to pass $3m superannuation accounts tax legislation
Labor could shun the Greens and work with the Coalition on increasing taxes on superannuation accounts worth more than $3m, after the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, signalled he was open to constructive talks to pass the delayed legislation. The deputy Liberal leader, Ted O'Brien, this week suggested possible talks as part of efforts to help address the structural budget deficit, but insisted the treasurer, Jim Chalmers, would have to radically change the proposal, including ending moves to tax unrealised gains. Labor plans to double the earnings tax on superannuation balances above $3m – from 15% to 30%. The plan, first announced in late 2023, affects only an estimated 80,000 people, and still leaves in place highly favourable tax treatment for retirement savings. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email Labor is expected to pass the changes with the support of the Greens, once the minor party has the sole balance of power in the Senate after 1 July. Politicians won't be exempt from the change, even if their retirement savings are in so-called defined benefit accounts. Separate regulation, allowing some payments to be deferred, is expected to explain how the accounts will be treated. Defined benefit rules are based on a formula for retirement savings – usually using an individual's salary level at retirement – rather than contributions made throughout their working life. Many politicians elected before 2014 are entitled to defined benefits, along with former bureaucrats and judges. The Greens leader, Larissa Waters, has warned Labor any special arrangements for politicians and other former public officials would be unworkable. The Greens also want a threshold of $2m so more account holders are covered by the tax. Speaking during a visit to Perth on Tuesday, Albanese said Labor was open to working with the Coalition. 'We obviously work with different parties. If the signal from the Coalition is across the board – I'm not talking specifically here – that they will be more constructive and not just be part of a 'No-alition' with the Greens party, then that would be welcome.' He said voters wanted MPs to work constructively and called on the Coalition to support Labor's plans to cut higher education debts for university graduates when parliament resumes on 22 July. Albanese said politicians are not exempt. 'They're not exempt, full stop.' 'That was clear in the previous legislation that was introduced.' Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion O'Brien told the Australian newspaper Labor's plans to tax unrealised capital gains, profits for investments which exist on paper because the asset has not be sold, would 'breach a red line'. 'But if Jim Chalmers is prepared to be humble for a moment and realise he's made a mistake and wishes to engage with me, my door is open,' O'Brien said on Monday. Albanese is expected to hold talks with Waters in coming weeks. Greens MPs are yet to settle on a final position on the issue. Waters told ABC radio the party was waiting to see the government's final proposal. 'There's been some suggestion that there'll be some changes to the government's approach, potentially giving politicians a free pass from this proposed super tax, which doesn't seem like such a good idea,' she said. 'In the last term we did think that you could raise more revenue from folk who are doing very nicely for themselves, and that it is important that we have a revenue base.' In the last parliament, key senate crossbenchers including David Pocock and Jacqui Lambie were opposed to taxing unrealised capital gains.
The Guardian
5 days ago
- The Guardian
Student protesters face expulsion from University of Melbourne over pro-Palestine office occupation
Two University of Melbourne students have been recommended for expulsion and two for suspension for taking part in a pro-Palestine demonstration at the university's Parkville campus last October. If the decisions are upheld, the students will become the first pro-Palestine student activists for whom suspension and expulsion have been enforced in Australia since the waves of student demonstrations against Israel's assault on Gaza began in 2023. The students intend to appeal against the decision, with one telling Guardian Australia she believed the outcome had been 'prejudged' by the university, which has implemented anti-protest rules that critics have characterised as 'repressive' and an 'authoritarian' overreach. The students were referred to the institution's disciplinary committee after reports they were part of a group of about 20 who, for about 90 minutes on 9 October, occupied the office of an academic they believed was integral to the university's partnerships with the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. The protesters were calling on the university to disband its joint programs with Israeli universities, which have been a target of the global boycott, divestment and sanctions movement since 2004. Footage of the occupation, distributed on social media at the time, showed protesters entering the office with their faces covered by keffiyehs, hoods and masks. The university alleged the students had harassed and intimidated staff who worked in the office, damaged property by placing signs and stickers on some university-owned items including a monitor screen, and writing on and placing stickers on personal items of the academic, including a photo. The students said their demonstration had been peaceful and clearly political, that they had informed people working in the office and nearby that they were protesting and had even offered to turn down the music they were playing so others could keep working. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email One student facing expulsion, Niamh*, who spoke to Guardian Australia on condition that her real name not be used, was found by the disciplinary committee to have been present at the demonstration for no longer than 10 minutes. Documents seen by the Guardian state she was not found to have performed any of the specific actions listed by the university as 'harassing or intimidating' the staff, such as placing stickers or graffiti, but that her presence in the room with others was itself harassment and intimidation, and also constituted improper and unsafe use of university property. The committee said they were recommending Niamh be expelled on the basis of 'the seriousness of the breaches and the nature of the behaviour' and her past alleged breaches of the student conduct code. Niamh said she believed this was a reference to her participation in the 'Mahmoud's Hall' occupation of the Arts West building, a demonstration that led to the university agreeing to additional disclosures about its research project grant arrangements. Niamh appeared to have been identified as being involved in the protest in part by the university tracking her location on campus through her wifi login, a tool that has been the subject of an investigation by the office of the Victorian information commissioner. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion She said she believed the activists had been 'prejudged' by the university council, beginning with the then vice-chancellor, Duncan Maskell, circulating a university-wide email the day after the protest characterising it as 'an attempt to harass and intimidate' the academic. Maskell's email was criticised in an open letter signed by 174 university staff members, which said the comments risked impeding procedural fairness and 'enabled the action to be incorrectly framed by major media outlets as antisemitic'. Maskell did not respond to the open letter. In May last year he implemented new university rules banning 'protest that is not peaceful' and prohibiting protesters who were not university staff or students from entering university grounds. On 3 March his successor as vice-chancellor, Emma Johnston, implemented another suite of rules against protests, including that they may not be held indoors and must not obstruct entries or exits of university buildings. The rules would apply to students and staff and also to 'individual forms of action'. The student union and the National Tertiary Education Union have called the new rules 'an authoritarian approach' that erroneously conflates staff and student discomfort with lack of safety. The Human Rights Law Centre, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have urged the university to rescind them. Niamh said Johnston's rules were 'particularly disturbing and hypocritical' and 'a massive betrayal of the values and history of student unionism' given Johnston's own history as the university's student union president in the 1990s, when she advocated for direct action protests including sit-ins. 'Her words are irreconcilable with her actions when some of the worst anti-protest rules are being pushed through under her leadership,' Niamh said. 'I would love to see the university take more of an approach of wanting to sit down with their students and wanting to really hear from where their students are coming from and why students around the world feel this urgent moral necessity to stand against … the horrible atrocities we're witnessing in Gaza as well as the West Bank and all of occupied Palestine,' she said. A spokesperson for the University of Melbourne said it would not comment on individual cases 'to protect the integrity of our disciplinary processes''. 'The University of Melbourne has followed its disciplinary processes in accordance with University policy in response to an incident that took place in October 2024,' the spokesperson said. 'This process has not concluded. The University is communicating directly with individuals involved in disciplinary proceedings. Students have the right to appeal decisions made through the University's disciplinary processes.' Last year an Australian National University student who was expelled and a Deakin University student who was suspended for Palestine-related activism had those decisions overturned on appeal. *Name has been changed
