The Victims of Crime Assistance League (ACT) has joined the Australian Federal Police Association (AFPA), bereaved families of motor vehicle crime victims, and the Canberra Liberals in calling for an independent review of sentencing in the ACT.

The Victims of Crime Assistance League (ACT) is very concerned that the length of criminal sentences in the ACT often falls well short of appropriate community standards.

We have been alarmed for many years about many examples, particularly in recent months, where apparently inadequate sentencing is having a significant impact on victims of crime, their families, and the community.

Given recent concerns raised by the Australian Federal Police Association, the Department of Public Prosecutions, and others calling for a review of sentencing in the ACT; VOCAL agrees that it is well past the time to undertake an independent review.

• Fight for independent review of bail is not yet over (12 October)
• ACT Chief Minister ignored them, bereaved families say (12 October)

The ACT Director of Public Prosecutions office reported that it had filed a much greater number of appeals against criminal sentences for serious crimes last financial year than in the previous financial year. Extraordinarily, it is reported that almost 70 per cent of those appeals in 2021/22 were successful.

[NOTE: The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has stated the record number of appeals against sentences fell “clearly short of community standards”. In August’s ACT Bar Bulletin, Mr Drumgold had stated that the number of Crown Appeals was significantly higher in 2021–22 than in previous years. The Canberra Times published a correction notice last month stating that the number of successful prosecution appeals, not the number of prosecution appeals filed, was significantly higher in 2021–22. The DPP filed 28 appeals in the ACT Court of Criminal Appeal, 25 per cent of which were Crown Appeals. The Crown was successful in 68 per cent of all appeals to the Court.]

We must ask if that level of appeal, and associated success rate of appeal, is well above any other jurisdiction in Australia. Such a high level of successful appeals would not be tolerated in other areas of our community, and it clearly indicates that sentencing for serious crimes in the ACT needs to be carefully and independently reviewed. Such a high level of appeal, and high success rate, place unnecessary financial and other demands on the legal system – resources that could be much better directed to other matters.

With a significant number of serious offenders back in the community after an inadequate sentence, this does not inspire confidence in the legal system in the ACT, nor a feeling of safety on our streets. Just what is the social and personal costs of having serious offenders being release far too early? We have seen frequent examples of these costs (including victims losing their lives) in the community in recent years, and especially in recent months.

Any consideration to undertake a review should not be dismissed based on the number of reviews undertaken by government, but rather on the basis of the issues, facts, and associated community concerns. ACT Governments and Ministers rightly and frequently take the time to undertake reviews into many issues and projects.

The decision to undertake a review into the serious matter of sentencing should not be left to Minister [Shane] Rattenbury [the Attorney-General] alone, who appears to have neither the time nor the inclination to undertake a review when the community is clearly crying out for it. It is clearly the role of governments and Ministers to undertake reviews – as is done in areas such as health, education, transport, environment, and finance.

Members of the Legislative Assembly, their staff, and the community at large may not be able to put themselves (and their families and friends) ‘in the shoes’ of the victims of serious crimes (and the families and friends of those victims) and try to begin to understand the long-term trauma arising from the crimes, but also the added trauma from the often inadequate sentencing attached to some crimes.

However, there are many forgotten members of the community who are dealing with these traumas over the long term.

In many cases, when perpetrators are released after an inadequate sentence, their victims or the victims’ families may come into contact with the perpetrator in the community without appropriate or timely warning from Corrective Services – further adding to the trauma arising from the crime.

If there is no consistency nor integrity (in relation to legal guidelines) in sentencing, then the community are very likely to further lose faith in the systems of law and government which are in existence to redress (as far as is possible) the serious effects of crime.

At the community level, the ACT Government has for many years ceased to fund VOCAL (ACT), which struggles to provide support to victims of crime.