Government commits to coercive control Bill but evidence must support making it a crime

The ACT has taken a step towards making coercive control a crime with the passing of an amended Canberra Liberals motion in the Legislative Assembly.

Coercive control – patterns of abusive behaviour towards a partner or ex-partner – is seen as a key factor in domestic violence, some of which extends to extreme harm or murder.

The Canberra Liberals, which introduced legislation last year that the government rejected, have argued that making coercive control a crime will give police the power to intervene before perpetrators inflict violence on their victims, most of whom are women.

The government contests this, saying police already have powers under current laws.

This week’s motion from Leader Leanne Castley called on the ACT Government to introduce legislation to criminalise coercive control in the ACT along the lines of NSW, but an amendment from Prevention of Family and Domestic Violence Minister Marisa Paterson, while agreeing to some form of legislation, aimed to put some guard rails around it.

Ms Castley hailed Thursday’s resolution as a win for Canberra, saying that the government had finally come around to accepting the need to make coercive control a criminal offence. But Ms Paterson’s amendment falls short of this commitment. It says any legislation must be informed by a review of laws in other jurisdictions and the current legislative framework in the ACT.

The amendment also calls on the government to consult with the Domestic Violence Prevention Council about the best way to respond to coercive control.

It calls for increased support for victims and frontline services, as well as more training and education for police and the judiciary.

Ms Paterson’s amendment reflects the government’s view that any legislation must be driven by evidence and that criminalisation carries some risks including victims being misidentified as perpetrators.

“Without proper training and education around coercive control for responders, there is a significant risk that the victim-survivors will be misidentified as perpetrators, which results in adverse and potentially lifelong consequences,” Ms Paterson told the Assembly.

She warned that misidentification itself may be exploited as a form of coercive control and systems abuse by perpetrators.

“This work will position us to ensure that we do introduce legislation that is effective, increases safety, and does not have negative unintended consequences,” Ms Paterson said.

Ms Castley, who drew on her own family’s experience of coercive control and abuse, told the Assembly that laws were already operating in other jurisdictions and the ACT was being left behind.

“Queanbeyan’s 20 minutes down the road,” she said. “We really need to move in lockstep at times with them, and step up,” she said.

Ms Castley said the longer the ACT left it, the more victims would suffer.

Apparently, Ms Paterson’s amendment was a shift from an earlier position which did not include criminalisation.

Ms Castley wondered if MLAs who voted against the Liberal Bill last August had had a change of heart.

“I do hope people have come to regret their decision, and I hope that that is recognised today and that we have a second chance, a chance to do the right thing and enact legislation to protect women, men, families,” she said.

The government is required to prepare a progress report by mid-September and a timeline for legislation.