Council recommends stronger sentencing to address sexual violence

The Sentencing of Sexual Assault and Rape: The Ripple Effect – Final Report, released today,
provides 28 critical recommendations to the government on how to improve sentencing outcomes
for victim survivors of sexual violence.

The Queensland Sentencing Advisory Council, an independent advisory body, submitted its final
report to the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and Minister for Integrity Deb Frecklington late
last year.

Council Chair the Honourable Ann Lyons AM said the report was the result of a 19-month
investigation that involved extensive research, analysis of data, case law, and legislation, and
significant consultation with stakeholders.

“To gain a deeper understanding of their experiences and perspectives, we engaged with victim
survivors, advocates and experts,” Ms Lyons said.

“Our findings revealed that current sentencing practices for sexual assault and rape do not
adequately address the needs of victim survivors or align with community expectations.

“Sexual assault and rape are often hidden, underreported, and misunderstood, leaving many in the
dark.

“This report aims to shine a light on the issue, providing crucial insights that can inform better
decision-making.

“I am confident that this report will serve as a valuable resource for policymakers and practitioners in
Queensland and beyond, shaping a more informed and effective response across Australia.”

Some key recommendations include the introduction of a new aggravating factor for rape and sexual
assault offences against children, changes to the use of ‘good character’ evidence in sexual offence
cases and recognising victim harm as an express purpose of sentencing.

Council Deputy Chair and Project Sponsor Professor Elena Marchetti said that these measures aim
to strengthen the law and send a clear message that sexual violence should not be tolerated.

“A new aggravating factor would require courts to consider rape and sexual assault offences
committed against children as more serious forms of offending, supporting higher sentences,”
Professor Marchetti explained.

Regarding the use of ‘good character’ evidence, Professor Marchetti said the report recommended
limiting its use to specific, relevant circumstances.

“Its use should be limited, and courts should be allowed to disregard it altogether as a basis for
reducing the sentence,” she said.

“Our recommended approach will ensure a more rigorous assessment of ‘good character’ evidence
in sexual offence cases and ensures its relevance is clearly established.

“Hearing that the person who raped or sexual assaulted them is considered a ‘good person’ or a
‘valued member of the community’ can be deeply traumatic and retraumatising for victim survivors.

“Suggestions that the offence was ‘uncharacteristic’ or a ‘temporary lapse in judgement’ can further
undermine their experience and hinder the offender’s genuine acceptance of responsibility for the
profound harm they have caused.”

The Council also recommended recognising victim harm as an express purpose of sentencing.

This crucial step aims to ensure that the courts fully acknowledge the profound and lasting impact of
these offences on victim survivors.

Professor Marchetti emphasised the importance of this recommendation.

She said victim survivors consistently reported feeling invalidated and devalued by the justice
system.

“The system does not work when sentencing outcomes fail to reflect the true harm caused and do
not adequately acknowledge the lifelong consequences of these offences,” she said.

“I would like to thank all those victim survivors who shared their experiences with us, as well as the
individuals and organisations who provided submissions.

“By sharing your experiences, you are paving the way for a more supportive system that will lead to
better sentencing outcomes for all.”