In New South Wales, a landmark reform has introduced a ban on good character references in sentencing for all convicted criminals, an Australia-first move that advocates and survivors say refocuses justice on harm caused rather than reputation. The ban on good character references is designed to limit arguments about a defendant’s character when penalties are determined, with officials arguing it will place greater emphasis on the offence and its impact.
The change applies across all NSW courts and all crimes, and is framed as a shift away from character-based mitigation toward accountability for the wrong done. Supporters say the policy addresses long-standing concerns that leniency could be influenced by a person’s background rather than the severity of the crime. Critics, however, caution that the practical effects may depend on how judges interpret the new rule and whether exceptions or safeguards are needed in complex cases.
The reform is being framed as part of a broader push for victim-centred justice, with survivor groups among the most vocal proponents. By removing arguments based on good character, proponents hope sentencing decisions will more clearly reflect the harm to victims and communities, while keeping the focus on public safety and proportional penalties. Lawmakers emphasize that the policy does not alter the courtroom process for presenting facts, but redefines what can be considered when weighing those facts in the final punishment.
Analysts say the move will require adjustments from defence teams and prosecutors alike, who will need to recalibrate how they prepare submissions and impact statements. The shift may also influence how sentencing submissions are framed in different kinds of crimes, from property offences to more serious offences against persons. While the aim is to improve consistency and public confidence, there is an expectation of further policy refinement as courts interpret the rule in practice.
What we know
- Legal scope: The ban applies across NSW courts and to all crimes, removing good character references from sentencing submissions.
- Policy aim: Described as an Australia-first reform intended to focus sentencing on the offence, harm, and accountability rather than personal reputation.
- Survivor response: Survivor groups have welcomed the move, arguing it reduces leniency based on character rather than the crime’s impact.
- Impact on submissions: Defence and prosecution teams will adjust how they present evidence and mitigation arguments in sentencing hearings.
- Broader justice context: The reform is framed within broader efforts to reform the criminal-justice system and enhance victims’ voices in sentencing outcomes.
Some observers caution that the practical effect will hinge on judicial interpretation and the presence of clear guidelines to avoid ambiguity in borderline cases. As with any major legal shift, the real-world impact may take time to assess, and ongoing monitoring by lawmakers and independent bodies is anticipated. The policy’s success, supporters say, will lie in its ability to standardise sentencing and reduce disparities tied to individual defendants’ backgrounds, while ensuring that accountability remains central to justice.
What we don’t know
- Judicial interpretation: How consistently judges will apply the ban across different offences and levels of culpability remains uncertain.
- Exceptions and safeguards: Whether any carve-outs or nuanced provisions will be introduced for specific cases, such as vulnerable victims or complex mitigating factors.
- Operational impact: The effect on court timings and the pace of sentencing hearings while practitioners adjust to the new rules is unclear.
- Victim-perceived outcomes: How survivors and communities will perceive sentencing fairness once the reform is fully in operation is still to be measured.
- Long-term justice metrics: Whether the reform will lead to measurable improvements in fairness, consistency, or recidivism remains to be seen.
As NSW rolls out this Australia-first reform, the coming months will reveal how courts implement the ban on good character references in sentencing and what adjustments may be required to balance accountability with nuanced legal considerations. Stakeholders are watching closely to see whether this new approach translates into clearer, more consistent outcomes for victims and the broader community, while preserving essential safeguards for defendants within a transparent justice system.
