Wednesday 7 October 2026
Evening EditionRSS
ZOTPAPER

News without the noise

ZOTPAPER
Australia

South Australia Proposes Ban on Good Character References in Sentencing

Reform follows national campaign and aims to align SA with New South Wales and Western Australia

By LineZotpaper
Published
Read Time2 min
The South Australian government has announced plans to ban the use of good character references for all convicted criminals during sentencing, following a nationwide campaign to abolish the practice. Attorney-General Kyam Maher said the proposed laws are a recommendation of the Royal Commission into Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence and would prevent the re-traumatisation of victim-survivors during court proceedings.

The state government says a new bill will be introduced to parliament in the first half of next year, with consultation beginning in the coming days.

Under current South Australian law, judges cannot consider good character evidence when sentencing child sex offenders if that perceived 'good character' directly assisted them in committing the offence. However, the evidence can still be considered if the offending did not rely on the offender's standing in the community, or if they had no prior convictions.

Survivor advocate Harrison James, co-founder of the Your Reference Ain't Relevant campaign, welcomed the change. 'There is nothing more dehumanising than sitting in the courtroom, hearing the person who harmed you described as "kind, generous and a good person",' Mr James said.

Attorney-General Kyam Maher said victim-survivors of child sex abuse should not have to be re-traumatised while hearing friends and family describe the offender as a 'good person' to minimise their sentence. Mr Maher said the review would bring South Australia in line with other states that have already restricted the use of character references, including Western Australia and New South Wales.

§

Analysis

Why This Matters

  • The reform would fundamentally change how hundreds of offenders are sentenced in South Australia, prioritising the experience of victims over the perceived social standing of the convicted.
  • It represents the next step in a national trend following changes in WA and NSW, increasing pressure on remaining jurisdictions to adopt similar bans.
  • The shift reflects a broader reckoning with how traditional legal practices can re-traumatise victims, particularly in cases of sexual and domestic violence.

Background

The use of 'good character' evidence in sentencing has long been a feature of common law, allowing offenders to present themselves as valuable community members to argue for leniency. Over recent years, survivor advocates have successfully campaigned against the practice in child sex offence cases, arguing it allows offenders to minimise serious crimes with unrelated positive traits. The South Australian proposal broadens this ban to cover all offences, a move recommended by the Royal Commission into Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence.

Key Perspectives

Harrison James and the Your Reference Ain't Relevant Campaign: Argue the law is necessary to end the dehumanisation of victims in court and ensure sentences are based on the offence, not the offender's reputation. South Australian Government (Attorney-General Kyam Maher): Sees the proposal as fulfilling a key royal commission recommendation and aligning SA with other states, prioritising the wellbeing and dignity of victim-survivors. Legal Community Critics (implied by the policy shift): A blanket ban on character references removes judicial discretion to consider the full context of an offender's life and rehabilitation prospects. Critics may argue it risks treating sentencing as purely punitive rather than individualised.

What to Watch

  • The final scope of the bill when introduced to South Australian parliament next year, including whether any exemptions or special provisions for particular offences remain.
  • Whether the federal government or other state governments announce similar blanket bans in response to the national campaign.
  • Any legal challenges to the reforms on the basis that they limit judicial discretion in sentencing, a long-established principle in Australian law.

Sources

Zotpaper

Written by software from the reporting listed above, scored by an automated standards desk, and published without a person reading it first. If something here is wrong, tell the editor and it will be put right.

How we workReport an errorSubscribe