Tim Watts (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The bill before the House amends the Commonwealth Criminal Code to introduce three new telecommunications offences.

These offences will criminalise the non-consensual sharing of private sexual images and films—a practice that is colloquially known as revenge porn.

I first introduced this bill more than 12 months ago on 12 October 2015.

I felt at the time that the case for this bill was so overwhelming I expected that, even if the government would not support a bill as introduced by the opposition, it would at worst fairly quickly introduce its own legislation to deal with this issue.

That has not been the case.

Twelve months have passed, and we are yet to see Commonwealth legislation on this issue.

The introduction of this bill has, however, prompted much other activity.

Shortly after the introduction of this bill, the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee established an inquiry into this issue and published a detailed report in February of 2016 calling for Commonwealth legislation of the kind currently before the House.

During public hearings as part of this inquiry, the Australian Federal Police advised the committee that unified and uniform legislation across Australia would be 'most helpful for police' and should substantially address jurisdictional issues within Australia that currently hinder both victims and police in pursuing allegations of non-consensual sharing of intimate images.

The Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions expressed concerns during the Senate inquiry that there are limitations on existing Commonwealth laws to adequately deal with revenge porn conduct.

Again, the government refused to act in response to this Senate inquiry and this evidence

Instead, the issue was punted to COAG.

COAG released a report in April of this year stating:

Existing laws that govern such offences do not adequately capture the scope or nature of these offences. To clarify the serious and criminal nature of the distribution of intimate material without consent, legislation should be developed that includes strong penalties for adults who do so.

The government has this morning again announced that technologically facilitated abuse will be high on the agenda of the COAG summit on reducing violence against women and their children.

All of this is good. In parallel, some—although not all—states have begun to criminalise this conduct at the state level. But even at the conclusion of this COAG process, there will still be no overarching Commonwealth law that can provide consistency—a baseline of protection—across the nation.

The approach by state governments is still piecemeal.

Only Victoria and South Australia currently make distributing intimate and sexually explicit images without consent a criminal offence.

Western Australia, Queensland and the ACT have indicated they will introduce state offences.

In Victoria, the offence carries a penalty of up to two years in prison, while in South Australia the maximum penalty is $10,000, or two years in jail.

New South Wales has made progress by seeking to criminalise revenge porn.

But this slow and convoluted process could have been avoided with some leadership and initiative from the Commonwealth government in response to the introduction of Labor's private member's bill on this issue.

The non-consensual sharing of private sexual material is an extremely serious matter.

Images of this nature are often accompanied by identifying information such as the full name, email or home address of the individuals concerned, or a place of business to further encourage harassment of the victims by strangers.

Victims understandably can experience significant emotional distress and are left vulnerable to cyber stalking, discrimination at work or even physical attacks.

The effects are far reaching, resulting in trauma and social, psychological, emotional and financial issues.

Victims often self-harm, suffer severe depression and life-long psychological issues.

Some big technology companies have begun to voluntarily remove revenge porn from their services. But the reality is that once an image is online it is likely to live on in a digital form in one corner of the internet or another forever.

The dissemination of revenge porn has an enduring impact on its victims in this way. The fear that this material may resurface lives on with victims well after actions have been taken.

There is little Australian data in this area, but British studies have overwhelming found that these acts disproportionately affect women.

It is frequently used as tool of power and control by men against their partners and former partners. One of the most disturbing aspects of this issue is the use, or the threatened use, of revenge porn as a way to keep women in abusive relationships.

Most concerning is the fact that this practice is increasingly common in the context of family violence.

When we released the exposure draft of this bill we received a lot of submissions that gave evidence that revenge porn is a factor present in a very large number of family violence cases today.

The Women's Services Network, in conjunction with the Women's Legal Service in New South Wales, conducted a national survey on technologically facilitated abuse. The survey found that 98 per cent of the 546 domestic violence workers surveyed reported that they had clients who had experienced technologically facilitated stalking and abuse of this kind.

Drs Powell and Henry, in the first Australian survey of online abuse and harassment, found that one in 10 Australians had a nude or semi-nude image of them distributed online, or sent to others, without their permission.

Drs Powell and Henry found a range of sources for these images, including:

… images obtained (consensually or otherwise) in an intimate relationship; photographs or videos of sexual assault/s; images obtained from the use of hidden devices to record another person; stolen images from the Cloud or a person's computer or other device; and pornographic or sexually explicit images that have been photo-shopped, showing the victim's face

Methods of distribution are varied, including: texting private images to friends, colleagues or family members; publishing images on social media sites; uploading images to pornographic websites. And there are many other avenues. The key common factor is that this is done without the consent of the person appearing in the images.

It is clear that, while this practice is commonly referred to as 'revenge porn', the sharing of, or threats to share, these images without consent occur in a much wider range of scenarios than simple revenge. As the Sexual Assault Support Service recognises:

Revenge is not the only motive to consider. Perpetrators of the behaviour may seek notoriety or financial gain, or believe that they are providing entertainment for others. Some perpetrators may intend to cause emotional harm to their targets and humiliate them, while others will give little or no thought to potential impacts.

The problem of revenge porn is complex and not only limited to the publishing of sexually explicit material intending to intimidate or humiliate the subject of a break-up or breakdown in a relationship.

Any non-consensual sharing of sexual images will be covered by the bill before the House.

Other jurisdictions have passed laws prohibiting these non-consensual acts:

We need a national approach to this issue in Australia.

These offences are serious and we believe a national approach is the best way forward.

The best way to protect women, regardless of where they live.

With respect to the specifics of this bill—it contains three new offences that will prescribe appropriate penalties for persons involved in revenge porn.

The bill creates an offence for a person to share sexual images and films of a person without their consent where it will cause them distress or harm.

The bill defines the images and films that are covered by these offences broadly.

The offences are inclusive of a range of cultural understandings, sexualities and gender identities.

The bill will ensure that different cultural contexts are taken into account when determining whether an offence has been committed.

For example, in some contexts a photo of a Muslim woman without a hijab might be considered an intimate image.

The bill also creates an offence for a person to make a threat to another person to share private sexual images or films that they are depicted in, or that another person that they care about is depicted in.

The penalty for these offences will be up to three years imprisonment.

We believe that this reflects the seriousness and the very serious impacts that this crime has on the victims.

The bill also creates an offence for a person to engage in those offences for the purpose of obtaining a benefit.

The penalty for this offence will be five years imprisonment.

The trading in revenge porn for commercial benefit increases demand for this kind of material and can consequentially be expected to increase its prevalence.

It should be regarded as an aggravated offence and attract a higher penalty.

It is unacceptable that victims are not currently protected under the law.

Without strong laws and punitive consequences, revenge porn will continue to be under-reported or unreported.

We must treat this seriously.

By challenging the blame that is often directed at victims we can move towards cultural change.

Move away from a culture that tells women to police their own behaviour.

Move away from comments about a woman was wearing when she was raped.

It is never a victim's fault for being the subject of a sexual attack or sexual abuse of this kind. A woman who has had her private sexual images distributed without her consent has done nothing wrong. The perpetrator here is the person who is acting without consent.

Passing this bill would send a clear message that the behaviour will not be tolerated by this parliament or in this country.

If we change the law we can change community perceptions of this conduct.

The law can shape social norms and affect community attitudes, but it is up to parliaments like this to send the message that this behaviour is not accepted in the community. Commonwealth legislation on this matter will send a clear signal to young men and women in Australia that this behaviour is not on.

I commend the bill to the House.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Gai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.