Citation

Kirchengast T. Int. J. Evid. Proof 2021; 25(1): 53-72.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2021, SAGE Publications)

DOI

10.1177/1365712720983931

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The past several decades have witnessed a shift toward victim interests being considered and incorporated within adversarial systems of justice. More recently, some jurisdictions have somewhat contentiously considered granting sex offences complainants' legal representation at trial. In Australia, the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Abuse (2017), the Royal Commission into Family Violence (2016) and the Victorian Law Reform Commission (2016) considered the potential role of legal counsel for complainants in the criminal trial process. While contrasting quite significantly with the traditional adversarial framework--which sees crime as contested between state and accused--legal representation for complainants is not unprecedented, and victims may already retain counsel for limited matters. Despite broader use of victim legal representation in the United States, Ireland and Scotland, and as recently considered by the Sir John Gillen Review in Northern Ireland, legal representation for sex offences complainants is only just developing in Australia. Notwithstanding recent reference to legal representation for complainants where sexual history or reputational evidence may be adduced, there exists no sufficient guidance as to how such representation may be integrated in the Australian criminal trial context. This article explores the implications of introducing such counsel in Australia, including the possible role of non-legal victim advocates.

Language: en

Keywords

complainant; Gillen Review; rape shield; sexual violence; victim legal representation