Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2017 Week 09 Hansard (Thursday, 24 August 2017) . . Page.. 3415 ..


Criminalisation of a non-consensual sexual image
(Question No 267)

Ms Le Couteur asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 12 May 2017:

(1) Has the Directorate undertaken any research or studies into giving effect to Recommendation 3 of the 2016 Senate Report titled “Final Report of the Senate Inquiry into the Phenomenon colloquially referred to as ‘revenge porn”; if so, what was the outcome of those studies.

(2) What data does the Directorate hold on the prevalence of the behaviours colloquially known as ‘revenge porn’ in the ACT.

(3) How does the Government respond to the 2016 report titled “More than Revenge” authored by Drs Flynn, Henry and Powell that notes the inadequacy of the current ACT legislation.

(4) Noting your comments that “some offences can be and are prosecuted under existing legislation”, how many instances of charges being brought under existing legislation against the behaviours colloquially known as ‘revenge porn’ in the ACT, and specifically under (a) section 61B of the Crimes Act 1900 being “intimate observations or capturing visual data etc”, that we understand was introduced in the aftermath of R v Daniel McDonald and Dylan Deblaquire [2013] ATSC 122 and similar reforms in other jurisdictions to combat unlawful “sexting” and the phenomena colloquially known as “upskirting” and “downblousing”, (b) section 35 of the Crimes Act 1900 being “stalking”, that we understand has elements of intent or recklessness and of repetition of the subject behaviour, (c) section 342 of the Criminal Code 2002 being “blackmail”, that we understand is the relevant charge in the “Grindr” matter currently before the ACT Supreme Court, (d) section 474.17 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) being “using a carriage service to menace, harass or cause offence”, that we understand was the relevant charge brought in R v Daniel McDonald and Dylan Deblaquire [2013] ATSC 122 and is, by the admission of the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, ineffective and poorly enforced and (e) what other sections are these subject behaviours penalised.

Mr Ramsay: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:

(1) The ACT Government is actively considering criminalising intimate image abuse in the ACT, as recommended in the Final Report of the Senate Inquiry into the phenomenon colloquially referred to as ‘revenge porn’. The ACT Government does not support the use of the term ‘revenge porn’ as it mischaracterises the nature of this conduct. The preferred term is ‘intimate image abuse’.

(2) Data on the number of charges laid in the ACT does not identify or classify the factual scenarios which might constitute intimate image abuse.

(3) The ACT Government acknowledges community concern that ACT Legislation does not sufficiently cover instances of intimate image abuse. The Government has been actively participating in national work on this area of reform through the Law, Crime, and Community Safety Council. The Government is committed to enacting legislation that is effective, and consistent with the National Statement of Principles Relating to the Criminalisation of the Non-Consensual Sharing of Intimate Images. The “More


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video