Justice Legislation Amendment (Committals) Bill

Thursday the 20th of February 2025,
Victorian Legislative Council

Rachel PAYNE (South-Eastern Metropolitan):

Acting President Broad, I too would like to congratulate you on your appointment to the Acting President role. I rise to speak on the Justice Legislation Amendment (Committals) Bill 2024 on behalf of Legalise Cannabis Victoria. This bill makes several important changes. These include abolishing the committal test, streamlining committal processes and allowing for the use of audiovisual links to conduct committal hearings. While I understand that some stakeholders oppose these changes, on balance this bill will go some of the way to improving efficiencies in the court system and bring us in line with several other jurisdictions in Australia. In my contribution today I would like to focus specifically on the changes this bill makes to strengthen protections for victims and witnesses at the committal stage.

This bill prohibits cross-examination at the committal stage of any witnesses in sexual offence cases, family violence cases and stalking cases. It also amends the test for granting leave to cross-examine witnesses in all other cases and extends special hearings to certain complainants in family violence cases. When thinking about the importance of these changes I would like to reflect on the stories of victim-survivors and their often incredibly difficult journey to accessing justice through our court system. Some of these stories were told in a recent article written by Melissa Cunningham and published in the Age. This powerful piece shared the author’s firsthand experience of attending the Specialist Family Violence Court. They wrote of the many different people who interacted with the court and the important measures in place to reduce the need for victim-survivors to be in extended, unpredictable and direct proximity to their alleged abusers. One of these people described in the article was a mother desperately trying to protect her teenage daughter from an abusive partner. Another was a woman who attended the court via video link seeking to extend an existing family violence intervention order. She was so frightened that she had sought special permission to remain off camera. That fear was very real, and the article describes how her estranged husband entered the courtroom demanding to speak to her and yelling at the video link.

Preventing re-traumatisation from cross-examinations

During what is clearly a deeply traumatising experience, specialist courts ensure that victim-survivors like these are kept as far from alleged perpetrators as possible and ensure that safety is paramount. These specialist courts are so vital. Even simple measures like a privacy screen for people giving evidence, so that they have the option not to see their abuser while doing so, make a huge difference. Perpetrators will harass and intimidate the victims, at times weaponising the legal system to do so.

For the victims, giving evidence and being cross-examined are some of the most intimidating parts of bringing their case before the court. The existing system allows most complainants and witnesses to be cross-examined multiple times. Every time they are put under the microscope they are questioned about every aspect of their deeply traumatic experience and brought back into contact with their alleged perpetrator, and often it is in the back of their mind the very real prospect that they will lose their case and this will all have been for nothing. This is why the proposal in this bill to prohibit cross-examination before trial to include all complainants in sexual offence, family violence and stalking proceedings is so important. There will still be the opportunity to cross-examine these witnesses in the trial court before appropriate cases. This change simply goes some of the way to reducing the burden on victim-survivors, recognising the unique challenges faced when giving evidence in these cases.

Victim blaming must be unlearnt

When you hear story after story of sexual assault victims being asked during cross-examination about the colour and the cut of their underwear, you are left appalled and asking yourself how these practices have been allowed to continue. Aside from changes to reduce the quantity of cross-examinations in these cases there needs to be better education and ongoing professional development for all members of the court on how to treat victim-survivors and dispel deeply harmful rape myths. The question ‘What were you wearing?’ must end. Without broader changes victim-survivors will suffer in silence, understandably unwilling to face a court system that is still grappling with how to unlearn victim blaming of survivors of sexual assault and family violence.

The Victorian Law Reform Commission’s report Improving the Response of the Justice System to Sexual Offences made these shortcomings glaringly clear. The laws as they are, at the time were not written to protect victim-survivors. It found that criminal trials should be less traumatic for victim-survivors and that there was a need for better directions for judges about rape myths. It acknowledged that victim-survivors can feel alone and made recommendations to ensure they are supported every step of the way.

Thankfully, the Victorian government has put in the work to overhaul the justice system’s response to sexual offences. Things are changing, and I await the further reforms this government intends to make in the family violence and stalking space later this year. There is still more work to be done, but this bill goes some of the way to improving victim-survivors’ experiences with accessing justice. Legalise Cannabis Victoria will be supporting this bill.

> Vicarious liability law reform is a matter of urgency – Rachel Payne
> Justice access for child sexual abuse victim-survivors – Rachel Payne
> Justice for survivors of non-institutional sexual assault – Rachel Payne
> Rise in family violence intervention order breaches – Rachel Payne
> Justice Legislation Amendment (Integrity, Defamation and Other Matters) Bill 2024 – Rachel Payne