{"id":"BILL-WA-CCA3F1B69E38378448258DB8000941B3","name":"Capturing Child Sex Offenders for Unlawful Consorting Bill 2026","slug":"capturing-child-sex-offenders-for-unlawful-consorting-bill-2026","collection":"bill","jurisdiction":"wa","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":"2026-03-12","administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":446158,"registerId":"BILL-WA-CCA3F1B69E38378448258DB8000941B3:current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-03-12","status":"in_force","reasons":null,"registeredAt":"2026-05-08T16:47:32.393Z"},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"retrieval-0001","sectionType":"document_chunk","heading":"Document excerpt 1","content":"# Capturing Child Sex Offenders for Unlawful Consorting Bill 2026\n\n60—1 page i\nWestern Australia\nCapturing Child Sex Offenders for Unlawful\nConsorting Bill 2026\nContents\n1. Short title 2\n2. Commencement 2\n3. Act amended 2\n4. Section 9 amended 2\n5. Section 17 amended 3\n6. Section 18 amended 3\n7. Section 43 amended 3\n\npage 1\nWestern Australia\nLEGISLATIVE COUNCIL\n(Introduced by Hon. Mr Nick Goiran, MLC)\nCapturing Child Sex Offenders for Unlawful\nConsorting Bill 2026\nA Bill for\nAn Act to amend the Criminal Law (Unlawful Consorting and\nProhibited Insignia) Act 2021.\nThe Parliament of Western Australia enacts as follows:\n\nCapturing Child Sex Offenders for Unlawful Consorting Bill 2026\ns. 1\npage 2\n1. Short title1\nThis is the Capturing Child Sex Offenders for Unlawful2\nConsorting Act 2026.3\n2. Commencement4\nThis Act comes into operation as follows —5\n(a) sections 1 and 2 — on the day on which this Act6\nreceives the Royal Assent;7\n(b) the rest of the Act — on the day after that day.8\n3. Act amended9\nThis Act amends the Criminal Law (Unlawful Consorting and10\nProhibited Insignia) Act 2021.11\n4. Section 9 amended12\n(1) In section 9(1)(c) delete “indictable offence.” and insert:13\n14\nindictable offence or child sex offence.15\n16\n(2) Delete section 9(2) and insert:17\n18\n(2) The reference in subsection (1) to conduct constituting19\nan indictable offence or child sex offence includes20\nconduct engaged in outside this State (including21\noutside Australia) that, if it occurred in this State,22\nwould constitute an indictable offence or child sex23\noffence.24\n25\n\nCapturing Child Sex Offenders for Unlawful Consorting Bill 2026\ns. 5\npage 3\n5. Section 17 amended1\nIn section 17(3)(b) delete “indictable offence.” and insert:2\n3\nindictable offence or child sex offence.4\n5\n6. Section 18 amended6\nDelete section 18(2)(a)(viii).7\n7. Section 43 amended8\nDelete section 43(2)(a)(viii).9","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"Yes. The Bill broadens the scope of the unlawful-consorting regime in two concrete ways: (1) it explicitly includes persons guilty of \"child sex offence(s)\" alongside \"indictable offences,\" thereby enlarging the class of persons whose associations can trigger consorting offences; and (2) it brings conduct engaged outside Western Australia (including overseas) within the Act where that conduct would have been an indictable offence or child sex offence if it had occurred in Western Australia, thereby creating an express extraterritorial reach. Both amendments extend the Act beyond its narrower original focus and create new evidential and enforcement implications. The deletions of s.18(2)(a)(viii) and s.43(2)(a)(viii) also change scope, but their precise effect requires comparing the deleted text in the existing Act."},"complexity_factors":["Short, focused amendments (adds phrase 'child sex offence' at two places and replaces one subsection).","Introduces extraterritorial application for offending conduct (new s.9(2)), which raises cross-jurisdictional evidential and legal-comparison complexity.","Deletes two subparagraphs (s.18(2)(a)(viii) and s.43(2)(a)(viii)) without providing their text — requires checking the principal Act to determine precise effect.","Relies on definitions and offence elements in the principal Act (e.g. definition of 'child sex offence') — cross-references increase interpretative steps.","Operational complexity for enforcement (proof of foreign conduct equivalence) though statutory text change itself is small."],"plain_english_summary":"**What this Bill changes (mechanically)\n\n- Adds \"child sex offence\" to the categories of offending that trigger the unlawful-consorting rules in the Criminal Law (Unlawful Consorting and Prohibited Insignia) Act 2021. Specifically, it replaces language in section 9(1)(c) and section 17(3)(b) that previously referred only to an \"indictable offence\" with wording that covers an \"indictable offence or child sex offence.\" (See s.4 and s.5 of the Bill.)\n\n- Expands the definition of the relevant conduct so that it expressly includes conduct engaged in outside Western Australia (including outside Australia) where, if that conduct had occurred in Western Australia, it would amount to an indictable offence or a child sex offence. This is done by replacing section 9(2) of the principal Act with a new paragraph to that effect. (See s.4(2) of the Bill.)\n\n- Deletes two specific subparagraphs from the principal Act: section 18(2)(a)(viii) and section 43(2)(a)(viii). The Bill does not show the text of those deleted subparagraphs; to see the precise legal effect you must compare the principal Act before and after the deletion. (See ss.6–7 of the Bill.)\n\nWho is affected\n\n- People who are subject to the unlawful consorting provisions: primarily people who have been convicted of offences that place them in the classes targeted by the Act. By adding \"child sex offence,\" the Bill brings people who have committed child sex offences within the scope of consorting restrictions where they were previously excluded or where only indictable offences were captured.\n\n- People who might associate with those persons: because the consorting offence is about association, family members, friends, support workers and service providers who interact with someone captured by the expanded definition could be affected in practice (for example, by having interactions scrutinised or becoming relevant to investigations).\n\n- Law enforcement and prosecuting authorities: police and prosecutors will decide when to investigate, charge and prove consorting offences; they will also have to assess overseas conduct for its equivalence to Western Australian offences.\n\nWhy this matters (claimed purpose and practical consequences)\n\n- The stated purpose in the Bill title and text is to ensure the unlawful-consorting law can apply to people who commit child sex offences and to conduct that happens outside Western Australia when that conduct would be an offence here. The mechanical effect is to broaden the pool of persons and conduct that can trigger consorting prohibitions and prosecutions.\n\n- Practical consequences and implementation considerations:\n  - Enforcement and proof: Prosecutors will need to show that an overseas act would have constituted an offence in Western Australia if it had occurred here. That can require gathering foreign evidence, translating laws and facts, or relying on foreign convictions or admissible overseas evidence. This increases investigative and prosecutorial cost and complexity.\n  - Administrative burden: Police and courts will face additional work to determine whether foreign conduct maps to Western Australian offences, and to monitor and prove prohibited associations involving the newly captured class of offenders.\n  - Effects on association and support networks: People subject to consorting restrictions will face the legal risk of prosecution for associating with other captured persons; in practice this can constrain private social and rehabilitative interactions. The Bill changes who is in that captured group by explicitly adding child sex offences.\n  - Discretion and litigation risk: Expanding the covered offences and adding extraterritorial reach increases discretionary decisions by police and prosecutors about when to pursue charges, and may produce new legal challenges about whether particular overseas conduct truly equates to a Western Australian offence.\n\nCosts and incentives (who pays and who decides)\n\n- Public costs: increased investigation, cross‑jurisdictional legal work, and prosecutions are borne by the State (police, courts, DPP). There may also be costs for international cooperation or evidence requests.\n\n- Private costs: people newly caught by the law (persons with child sex offence histories), and those who associate with them, bear the risk of criminal sanctions, monitoring, and possibly reduced opportunities for association or employment where association is relevant.\n\n- Decision-makers: police and prosecutors decide when to investigate and charge; courts decide whether the consorting elements are proven; lawyers and courts will be called on to interpret whether overseas conduct is equivalent to local offences.\n\nTrade-offs, risks and implementation issues\n\n- Trade-offs: the Bill broadens regulatory reach in the name of capturing a particular class of offending and of extraterritorial conduct. That increases public protection scope (as claimed) but also raises enforcement costs and the evidentiary difficulty of proving overseas conduct.\n\n- Risk of overbreadth or unintended capture: because consorting offences criminalise association with certain classes of people, broadening that class can impose criminal risk on otherwise lawful social, family or rehabilitative connections unless safeguards or prosecutorial discretion are carefully exercised.\n\n- Legal uncertainty from deleted provisions: the Bill removes two subparagraphs from the principal Act (s.18(2)(a)(viii) and s.43(2)(a)(viii)). Without the prior text shown here, readers must check the current Act to see what exceptions or definitions have been removed and how that alters operation.\n\nWhere to look next\n\n- To apply these changes you must read the amended sections in the context of the Criminal Law (Unlawful Consorting and Prohibited Insignia) Act 2021: particularly the definitions (for example, how \"child sex offence\" is defined, and the existing consorting offence elements), and the deleted subparagraphs in sections 18(2)(a)(viii) and 43(2)(a)(viii) to see what specific removal changes.\n\n(Sections amended: s.4 updates s.9(1)(c) and replaces s.9(2); s.5 updates s.17(3)(b); ss.6–7 delete s.18(2)(a)(viii) and s.43(2)(a)(viii).)\n"}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/capturing-child-sex-offenders-for-unlawful-consorting-bill-2026","history":"/api/acts/capturing-child-sex-offenders-for-unlawful-consorting-bill-2026/history","analysis":"/api/acts/capturing-child-sex-offenders-for-unlawful-consorting-bill-2026/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/capturing-child-sex-offenders-for-unlawful-consorting-bill-2026/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/capturing-child-sex-offenders-for-unlawful-consorting-bill-2026/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/capturing-child-sex-offenders-for-unlawful-consorting-bill-2026/documents"}}