Arrow Right Arrow Left Bsky Calendar Close Facebook Home Instagram LinkedIn Members Hub Newsletter Plus Search Toggle X

Submissions

NZ Parliament Victims of Sexual Violence Strengthening Legal Protections Bill

To: Justice Select Committee
Date: January 2025

 

Purpose

This submission’s primary purpose is to support the legislation with amendmentsthat enhance legal protections for victims of sexual violence, particularly by extending automatic name suppression to all victims and empowering them with greater control over name suppression decisions. Critically, DPA also aims to ensure that disabled victims receive the necessary wrap-around support and accommodations to participate equitably in legal proceedings, recognising their disproportionately higher risk of sexual violence.

Summary of DPA submission

DPA supports the Victims of Sexual Violence (Strengthening Legal Protections) Amendment Bill (Amendment Papers 215 and 216), with proposed amendments. DPA emphasises a disability lens on the legislation, highlighting that disabled people face a much higher risk of sexual violence compared to non-disabled individuals. The Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) notes that disabled women and children are significantly more likely to be victims, and disabled adults experience higher prevalence rates of sexual assault and intimate partner violence (48% vs. 30% for non-disabled adults). Furthermore, disabled victims are less likely to report offending due to fear or dependence on perpetrators, which can hinder their participation in legal proceedings.

DPA supports Amendment Paper 215, which extends the right to automatic name suppression to cover all victims/survivors of sexual violence cases, deeming it a "sensible and long overdue change" that will provide essential protection. Regarding Amendment Paper 216, DPA supports the insertion of new Clause 6A, creating a victim-agreed system of permanent name suppression, provided that additional safeguards for both victims/survivors and defendants are incorporated.

DPA believes that removing automatic name suppression for offenders would empower survivors to have greater control over the identity of their accused perpetrators, thereby minimizing potential abuses of power and privilege by wealthy or influential defendants, as highlighted by the James Wallace case. This measure also serves the public interest by potentially encouraging other victims to come forward.

DPA acknowledges the inherent risks identified in the RIS, such as further harm to defendants' families, additional trauma for survivors, and potential pressure on complainants under 18. To mitigate these, DPA supports Option 4 from the RIS, which provides further protections.

DPA's recommendation for Option 4 specifies that victim-agreed name suppression should not apply to victims under the age of 16 (aligning with the age of sexual consent), victims who are unwilling or unable to engage, or where not all victims agree. It also includes provisions for judges to make decisions if there may be detrimental consequences for third parties or if a convicted person is at risk of self-harm if identified. DPA emphasises that judges should have discretion to apply name suppression for disabled offenders in exceptional circumstances where naming would disproportionately impact them.

 

Key Recommendation/Finding:

DPA recommends that victims are given greater wrap around support and resourcing to participate in sexual violence cases, especially when it comes to the issue of dealing with offender name suppression issues and the giving of evidence.

 

Supporting Statement 1:

"Disabled adults experience higher prevalence rates of sexual assault and intimate partner violence than non-disabled adults (48 percent and 30 percent, respectively)."

 

Supporting Statement 2:

"These factors can lead to an unwillingness or inability to participate in legal proceedings around sexual violence."

 
 

Related submissions