The Law Council of Australia has warned that proposed federal changes to extend mandatory minimum sentences for child sexual abuse offences risk undermining judicial independence and the fair administration of justice.
The Crimes Amendment (Mandatory Minimum Sentences for Child Sexual Abuse) Bill 2025 was introduced as a Private Member’s Bill this week, proposing to broaden the existing sentencing scheme to cover a wider range of Commonwealth child sex offences.
Law Council President Juliana Warner said that while sexual offences involving children are “highly serious and deserving of strong penalties,” the proposed expansion represents “an undue incursion on judicial discretion.”
“Sentences must reflect the severity of the conduct and protect our community,” Warner said. “However, judicial independence and discretion are bedrocks of our justice system, and mandatory sentencing unduly undermines these essential foundations.”
Mandatory minimum sentencing currently applies only to the most serious Commonwealth child sex offences and to repeat offenders. The Law Council notes that the Attorney-General’s Department’s 2024 review of the scheme did not recommend expansion.
That review emphasised the broad spectrum of offending captured by these provisions – from a single act of online access to the large-scale production or distribution of child abuse material – and concluded that courts must retain flexibility to distinguish between different levels of culpability.
Warner said that upholding the role of the courts to administer justice according to the individual circumstances of each case was “essential,” and that there is “a lack of compelling evidence as to the effectiveness of mandatory sentencing as a deterrent or its ability to reduce crime.”
“It is almost always bad policy to make significant changes to sentencing law based on a single case where judicial discretion is thought to have been exercised too leniently,” she said. “Especially when it has not, or not yet, been reviewed by a court of appeal.”
The Law Society of Western Australia has long supported the Law Council’s position that mandatory sentencing erodes judicial independence and undermines community confidence in the courts.
The Society has consistently argued that sentencing should remain a matter for the judiciary, guided by established principles and subject to appellate review — not constrained by prescriptive statutory minimums.
In previous submissions, the Society cautioned that mandatory sentencing can lead to unjust outcomes by removing a judge’s ability to consider mitigating factors, cultural context, and individual rehabilitation prospects – concerns that are particularly acute in Western Australia, where regional and remote communities already face high incarceration rates.
Both the Law Council and the Law Society reaffirmed that community safety – particularly the protection of children – remains paramount. But, they said, it must be pursued through evidence-based reform rather than reactive legislation. “Judicial independence and discretion have long underpinned our justice system – and must always do so,” Warner said. “These principles ensure that justice is delivered according to law, not popular opinion or political pressure.”
