The West Australian
WA is dragging its feet on outlawing coercive control despite the insidious behaviour already being banned in NSW and Queensland and domestic violence groups begging for legislation to put abusers on notice.
Frontline workers say outlawing coercive control would be a crucial “step forward” in fighting the scourge of domestic violence but the laws are yet to be introduced to parliament more than a year after consultation was held.
Coercive control is a pattern of controlling and manipulative behaviour by a partner and can include controlling a person’s finances, belittling, controlling someone’s movements and independence such as stopping them from going to work or school, and isolating them from friends and family.
Attorneys-general from across Australia will meet on Friday with the national principles on coercive control, a nationwide-wide plan for legislation, high on the agenda.
The meeting comes after two women in WA were allegedly murdered by their former partners in the space of a fortnight — Tiffany Woodley was fatally bashed in her Bedford home and Georgia Lyall was killed by ex Luke Noormets in a murder-suicide in South Guildford.
Laws to criminalise coercive control have been passed in NSW and introduced in Queensland, with WA reviewing its legislative response.
The NSW law means offenders found guilty of coercive control can face up to seven years in jail.
When consultation on criminalising coercion in WA occurred in 2022, the proposal received a complete endorsement from Full Stop Australia, a leading organisation in fighting sexual abuse and domestic violence.
The FSA, in its submission, said new laws would be “an important step forward” in sending a message to perpetrators and the wider community.
“Criminalisation signifies a move away from incident specific framing of gender-based violence towards a legal system which recognises patterns of violence and looks at the history of a relationship,” the submission read.
FSA also said it would ensure the justice system captured “all forms of violence”, including non-physical violence.
Premier Roger Cook said the commissioner for Victims of Crime was consulting with the community, with the Government understanding it was a difficult area to legislate.
“We want to understand how we can best regulate and police it and we will make decisions on the basis of that advice,” he said.
Mr Cook said WA would look to learn from the NSW laws in forming its own legislation.
No to Violence — the peak body dealing with men who commit domestic and family violence — also supported a legislative response to coercive control but stressed it must come along with a boost in resources in the DV sector.
“The efficacy of a new offence will only be realised if there is adequate capacity and capability building across the criminal justice and services sector, including importantly that the family violence sector is adequately resourced to provide connected services for victim-survivors and perpetrators,” NTV wrote.
The Australian Psychological Society acknowledged that coercive control was “insidious” and could be “devastating” but was far more apprehensive about criminalising the behaviour.
“Regulation is challenging to enforce ... as coercive and controlling behaviour is difficult to define and is contextual in nature,” it wrote.
The APS said while there could be benefits in codifying coercive control, questions remained about the “readiness of the legal system and broader social systems” to implement the laws.
“From a psychological perspective, the APS suggests there may be both advantages and disadvantages to legislating against coercive control,” the submission read.
The APS listed the disadvantages as “punitive measures ... do not necessarily lead to a decrease in aggressive behaviour”, it would be hard to prosecute, it would add pressure to an already stretched system and there would be a risk the evidence threshold would place a stressful burden of proof on the victim.
The WA Council of Social Services also had concerns about potential new laws, writing that while new laws might be “symbolically appealing”, they could also have “unintended consequences”.
“There is currently little evidence to indicate how new criminal offences would impact communities who are already subject to systemic harm and marginalisation by the justice system,” the council said.
“This lack of evidence means that it is challenging to determine whether criminalisation as an approach improves outcomes for victim-survivors.”
WACOSS called for a range of investments along with legislation including a boost in funding to men’s behaviour change programs and “a specialist FDV sector”, prioritising early intervention, working with marginalised groups to ensure supports are culturally appropriate and more training of police and the courts in dealing with domestic violence crimes.
“If the above priority and prerequisite recommendations are not implemented as part of a whole-of-systems response to family and domestic violence, WACOSS is of the opinion that it would be unwise, harmful and potentially dangerous to introduce new legislation that criminalises coercive control in WA,” it said.