In short:
The SA government is proposing abolishing the use of good character references during sentencing for all criminal offences in the state's courts.
A survivor advocate who campaigned for the change, says hearing good character references in court is "dehumanising" for victims.
What's next?
The proposed new laws will be released for consultation, and the state government expects to introduce a new bill next year.
South Australia is proposing a ban on the use of good character references for all convicted criminals during sentencing, following a nationwide campaign to abolish their use in courts.
Survivor advocate Harrison James co-founded the Your Reference Ain't Relevant campaign to push for governments to ban the use of good character references in child sex offence cases four years ago, and says the proposed laws would make a tangible difference for victim-survivors.
"There is nothing more dehumanising than sitting in the courtroom, hearing the person who harmed you described as 'kind, generous and a good person',"he said.
"Imagine surviving the worst thing somebody has ever done to you, only to sit in court and hear about the best things they've ever done for everyone else."
The state government says current SA laws allow an offender to tender evidence of their good character or call friends, family or employers to give evidence to support arguments for leniency in sentencing.
The existing laws prevent judges from considering good character evidence while sentencing child sex offenders, when their suggested "good character" assisted them to commit the offence.
However, the current laws allow the evidence to be considered if the offending occurred without the air of their good character, or if they had a lack of prior convictions.
Attorney-General Kyam Maher says consultation on the reforms would begin in the coming days, with a new bill to be introduced to parliament in the first half of next year.
He said a review of the laws, was one of the recommendations from the Royal Commission into Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence, and would bring SA in line with other states, including New South Wales and Western Australia.
"Child sex offenders are some of the most horrific crimes and have profound and lasting impact on the victim-survivors," Mr Maher said.
"Victim-survivors of children sex abuse should not have to be re-traumatised during the court process while hearing friends and family of the offender describe them as a 'good person' to try and minimise their sentence.
"If you have been found guilty of an offence, your sentence should not be minimised because you have managed to deceive some people into believing you are a person of 'good character'."
A review of the Your Reference Ain’t Relevant campaign by the NSW Sentencing Council recommended good character references should be abolished in sentencing for all types of offences, not just child sex offences.
It also recommended courts retain the ability to consider factors such as an offender's prospects of rehabilitation, prior convictions and likelihood of reoffending.
Mr James said the campaign was not about discounting personal circumstances and did not aim to abolish those objective and relevant sentencing considerations, but the subjective description of offenders.
He said offenders "should not be able to weaponise their reputation to minimise the consequences of their violent offending".
"The fact that somebody was a wonderful colleague, neighbour or football coach doesn't make what they did to their victim any less serious and a survivor shouldn't have to compete with an offender's reputation in the courtroom," he said.
"Your reputation should never be a discount on your sentence."
