Gag laws not strong enough

SEXUAL abuse survivors and legal advocates say they are disappointed that the bill to reform Tasmania’s repressive victim gag laws does not go far enough and will still silence survivors unnecessarily.

This week, Attorney-General Elise Archer introduced a bill to reform section 194K of the Evidence Act, so that sexual assault survivors will be free to self-identify in media provided they are over 18, consent to being named, and provide that consent in writing.

But the proposed law has been criticised by some advocates as it will not allow survivors to be named until all possible avenues of appeal have been exhausted following a conviction.

“That could be years and years” says CEO of Beyond Abuse, Steve Fisher. “Even after a person is found guilty, sentenced to jail, and served their time, they can still be bringing appeals in order to have their name struck off the sex offender registry.”

“This can go on endlessly, while the survivor is left lost, without a voice.”

Mr Fisher says the proposed amendment will also create a “double standard” where defendants will be free to speak to the media under their full names and “control the narrative” throughout proceedings, while victims will be forced to remain fully de-identified, until the completion of all appeals.

Most other Australian jurisdictions allow adult victims to self-identify in media throughout proceedings, and rely on contempt laws, suppression orders and defamation laws to protect the trial process and the interests of defendants.

Michael Bradley, managing partner of Marque Lawyers, says that if the Tasmanian bill is passed in its current form, it “will leave Tasmania out on a limb compared to most of the other jurisdictions.”

“It’s illogical. Lawmakers have gone half way, but stopped” says Mr Bradley.

“The only reason to maintain the prohibition until the end of the criminal proceedings is to protect the interests of the accused, which should be a discretionary matter for the judge to deal with by suppression orders when appropriate.”

Mr Bradley said there was also a “public interest” argument for survivors to be able to self-identify in media earlier rather than later.

Attorney General, Elise Archer, said “ensuring a right to a fair trial” was a “key consideration during the development of the Evidence Amendment Bill 2020.”

Ms Archer said victims would be free to speak out during civil proceedings provided all criminal proceedings - including any appeals - were finalised.

Ms Archer also assured the public that the proposed changes to the law would not compromise trials or undermine the rights of defendants.