Social Policy Scrutiny Committee Inquiry into the Criminal Code Amendment (Intimate Images) Bill 2017 March 2018
Tabled paper 650
Tabled Papers for 13th Assembly 2016 - 2020; Tabled Papers; ParliamentNT
2018-03-13
Tabled by Ngaree Ah Kit
Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory under Standing Order 240. Where copyright subsists with a third party it remains with the original owner and permission may be required to reuse the material.
English
Tabled papers
Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory
Darwin
application/pdf
Copyright
See publication
https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2019C00042
https://hdl.handle.net/10070/294464
https://hdl.handle.net/10070/396375
Examination of the Bill 31 Legal Service pointed out that this does not necessarily prevent people from being identified: As a service, we have had circumstances in a very different context, but where those anonymity provisions take place but there is still a connector there. Whilst a person is referred to as XY, perhaps they are referred to as mother of name, and she is the mother of XY. Or course, you have just made that direct link.72 However, it was further noted that where issues have arisen regarding the inappropriate identification of parties to proceedings, the tribunals and courts are extremely responsive to services flagging those issues and removing them properly.73 3.56 Noting that non-publication provisions do not apply in other jurisdictions that have enacted offences regarding the non-consensual sharing of intimate images, the Department advised the Committee that: Including the offences proposed in the NT Bill to the definition of sexual offences for the purposes of the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act or including a provision similar to section 6 of that Act in the NT Bill is not a course that would be taken, particularly in the absence of any precedent in other jurisdiction, without extensive consultation. The power in section 57 of the Evidence Act for a court to make a suppression order is, in the view of the AGD, sufficient to ensure that the interests of justice, including balancing the principle of open justice with any harms that could ensue from publication of identifying material, are met.74 Committees Comments 3.57 While acknowledging the concerns raised by witnesses, the Committee is satisfied with the Departments explanation. Non-Consensual Recording of Images 3.58 Concern was raised that the Bill does not criminalise the recording of non-consensual intimate images such as up skirting, down blousing or the surreptitious filming of intimate images in public or private places.75 In February 2016, the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee recommended that, in addition to offences for sharing or threatening to share intimate images without consent, the states and territories also enact legislation that criminalises the non-consensual recording of intimate images.76 3.59 The importance of enacting laws to criminalise all aspects of non-consensual sharing of intimate images was highlighted in the Senate inquiry with service providers noting that it would send a clear message to the community that conduct of this type is 72 Ms Caitlin Weatherby-Fell, Committee Transcript, 14 February 2018, p.12 73 Ms Caitlin Weatherby-Fell, Committee Transcript, 14 February 2018, p.12 74 Department of the Attorney-General and Justice, Answers to Written Questions, 13 February 2018, https://parliament.nt.gov.au/committees/spsc/CCA#TP, p.13 75 NT Legal Aid Commission, Submission No. 1, p.2; RMIT University and Monash University, Submission No. 2, p.4 76 Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee, Phenomenon colloquially referred to as revenge porn, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra ACT, February 2016, p.viii https://parliament.nt.gov.au/committees/spsc/CCA#TP