The Bill’s main concepts are (1) a consolidated, factor-driven bail decision framework; (2) expanded and specified procedural duties around family violence information and victim input; and (3) treatment-oriented and culturally attuned assessment requirements for particular cohorts.

1. Factor-driven bail decision framework

   • Section 22 sets out three core matters for adults: likelihood of appearance; likelihood while released of committing an offence, harassing or endangering safety or welfare, or interfering with evidence/intimidating witnesses/obstructing justice; and the interests of the adult. For children, the primary consideration is the child’s best interests, with parallel considerations on appearance and risk while released (new s 22(1)-(2)).
   • Section 22A instructs courts and authorised officers to consider a non-exhaustive list of relevant factors including seriousness of the offence, character and community ties, effect of refusal of bail on family or dependants, history of compliance with bail and other orders, strength of the case against the person, need for physical protection, likely period and conditions of custody if bail is refused, whether released on bail at time of offence, behaviour towards primary victims, whether the offence is a family violence offence, and the likelihood of using family violence if released and how to manage that risk (new s 22A).

2. Cohort-specific assessment requirements

   • Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people: s 22B requires explicit consideration of custodial harms, effects on cultural and family connections, trauma and child-welfare interactions, social and economic disadvantage, carer responsibilities, and other cultural obligations. Subsection (2) expressly provides that proof is not required for two matters: that Indigenous people experience harm in custody disproportionately and that maintaining cultural connections is in the person’s interests.
   • Disability and health conditions: s 22C mandates consideration of treatment and support needs and how the condition affects the person’s ability to understand rights and obligations, make and communicate decisions, and represent their interests.
   • Children: s 22D requires adherence to youth justice principles in the Children and Young People Act 2008, consideration of court-ordered reports where provided, age and maturity, least onerous necessary bail conditions, preserving relationships, safe stable living arrangements, therapeutic support, education/training/employment continuity, stigma avoidance, and effects of custody. It also contains a no-proof-required clause for several best-interests matters (s 22D(2)).
   • Pregnant people: s 23 directs courts to consider effects of custody and bail conditions on the person and on the unborn child.

3. Victims and victim representatives

   • The Bill defines "primary victim" and creates a broader definition of "victim" to include family members, dependants, substitute decisionmakers for legally incompetent persons and close family in case of a death (s 19).
   • It creates a new category "victim representative" who can act for victims in specified ways, including nominated persons in writing, parents for child victims, guardians or attorneys for legally incompetent victims (s 21).
   • Section 23A allows victims to express concerns and give information to "relevant justice agencies", defined as the chief police officer or the Director of Public Prosecutions, and prescribes when prosecutors must or may make submissions to courts based on victim information.

4. Information duties and notice

   • Informants (police) must tell authorised officers or courts whether a family violence order exists against an accused (new ss 15(1A) and 19(2A)). Schedule 1 inserts that family violence order information is a category of information that the Family Violence Act 2016 contemplates may be given to authorised officers or courts under the Bail Act (Schedule 1, Part 1.1).
   • The Victims of Crime Act is amended to require relevant justice agencies to "take all reasonable steps to ask" victims whether they have concerns about the need for protection when bail is being considered or reviewed (Schedule 1, Part 1.2).

5. Terminology and definitions

   • Terminology standardisation: the Bill replaces multiple references to "undertaking to appear" with the defined concept "bail undertaking" (s 22 substitution list), and creates precise definitions for disability, health condition, child welfare law and other terms (ss 6, 16-18). "Harm" is defined expansively to include pregnancy and economic loss among other harms (s 18).

The Bill combines mandatory "must" duties with a broad discretion to consider "any matter the court or officer considers relevant" (s 22A), creating a framework that is both prescriptive in certain respects and non-exhaustive in others. The cumulative effect is to embed specified protective and cohort-sensitive considerations within existing bail decision-making processes.

Primary decision-makers and institutions affected by the Bill are courts, "authorised officers" who decide bail questions outside court, informants (typically police), prosecutors, the chief police officer and the Director of Public Prosecutions (as "relevant justice agencies"), victims and nominated victim representatives, and custodial authorities.

• Courts and authorised officers

  • Courts and authorised officers must apply the new statutory framework when deciding grants of bail for adults and children (new s 22). The Bill prescribes mandatory factors and cohort-specific considerations that these decision-makers "must" consider (ss 22-23A). That changes the legal analysis and the list of factors that must be recorded and weighed during bail hearings and authorisations.

• Informants and police

  • An informant is required to provide authorised officers and courts with information about whether a family violence order has been made under the Family Violence Act 2016 against an accused person (new s 15(1A); new s 19(2A)). This places an information-gathering and disclosure duty on informants. The Victims of Crime Act amendments also require relevant justice agencies (which include police) to take all reasonable steps to ask victims about protection concerns when bail decisions are being considered or reviewed (Schedule 1, Part 1.2, substituted s 17(1)).

• Prosecutors (DPP)

  • Prosecutors gain a statutory role in lodging submissions arising from victim-expressed concerns. Section 23A makes clear that where a victim has expressed a concern about the need for protection, the prosecutor may make a submission and must make a submission if the victim has expressly requested the court be informed. The prosecutor may also make further submissions about other information provided by victims that relate to s 22 matters (new s 23A(2)).

• Victims and victim representatives

  • The Bill expands who counts as a victim and allows victims or victim representatives to express concerns to "relevant justice agencies" and give information that may lead to prosecutor submissions or inform bail decision-makers directly (new s 23A and revised dictionary definitions at ss 19-21). A "victim representative" may be a parent, legal guardian, attorney, or a person nominated in writing by a primary victim to perform specific functions (s 21).

• Accused persons and specific cohorts

  • Accused adults, children, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, people with disability or health conditions, pregnant people, and legally incompetent persons are directly affected, because the Bill imposes explicit considerations for each cohort that decision-makers "must" take into account in bail decisions (ss 22, 22B-22D, 23).

• Administrative actors

  • Courts’ registry staff, police victim liaison officers and AFP staff with victim liaison functions will be operationally affected by the new notification and consultation pathways (s 13; schedule [1.1] and [1.2]). The Bill changes who can be a source of notification and who may receive victim information.

Who pays

• Administrative costs will be borne by police services and the DPP to implement new information-gathering and submission obligations (new ss 15(1A), 19(2A), 23A; Schedule 1 amendments to Victims of Crime Act). Courts will incur administrative burden in recording consideration of expanded factors and dealing with additional prosecutor submissions and victim-derived material. Accused persons may face different bail outcomes and potentially more or different bail conditions (s 22A(k), examples).

Who decides

• The Bill leaves ultimate decision-making authority with courts and authorised officers, but it modifies who must supply information to them (informants, prosecutors) and what factors they must consider. The prosecutor’s discretion is curtailed in one respect: when a victim has expressly indicated the court should be informed, the prosecutor must make a submission (new s 23A(2)(a)(ii)).

Behavioral effects

• Police and informants are incentivised to check and report family violence orders because those checks are statutory duties for bail processes (new ss 15(1A), 19(2A)).
• Victims (or their representatives) are given clearer statutory pathways to make safety concerns known and to influence bail decision-making indirectly through prosecutor submissions and direct provision of information to relevant justice agencies (new s 23A).
• Courts and authorised officers must document consideration of the specified factors for particular cohorts, which will influence bail outcomes and conditions and may lead to an increase in protective bail conditions or use of orders under the Family Violence Act 2016 as an example of risk management (s 22A(k), examples).

The Bill does not introduce new criminal sanctions connected with the duties it inserts; its primary effect is procedural and evidentiary, shaping the flow of information and the list of matters courts and authorised officers must consider.

This Bill establishes a mix of mandatory duties for state actors and rights for victims and certain accused cohorts by specifying matters decision-makers must consider.

Mandatory duties imposed on state actors

• Informant disclosure of family violence orders

  • The informant must give an authorised officer information about whether a family violence order has been made under the Family Violence Act 2016 against an accused person (new s 15(1A)). The informant must also give the court such information (new s 19(2A)). The Bill treats these as mandatory duties by using "must".

• Prosecutorial submission duties

  • Where a court is considering bail and the prosecutor is aware that a victim has expressed a concern about the need for protection, the prosecutor may make a submission about the concern; and if the prosecutor is aware the victim has expressed that the court should be informed about the concern, the prosecutor must make the submission (new s 23A(2)(a)(i)-(ii)). The prosecutor may make further submissions about other victim-provided information relevant to s 22 matters (new s 23A(2)(b)).

• Victim-consultation duty under Victims of Crime Act

  • The Victims of Crime Act is amended so that, if a court or authorised officer is considering whether to grant bail to, or is reviewing a bail decision for, an accused person, a relevant justice agency must take all reasonable steps to ask a victim whether they have any concerns about the need for protection from violence or harassment by the accused person (Schedule 1, substituted s 17(1)).

Mandatory considerations for decision-makers

• Section 22 requires that in making a bail decision for an adult a court or authorised officer must consider: the likelihood of appearance; the likelihood while released of committing an offence, harassing or endangering safety/welfare, or interfering with evidence/intimidating witnesses/obstructing justice; and the interests of the adult (new s 22(1)). For children, the primary consideration is the child’s best interests with the parallel appearance and risk considerations (new s 22(2)).

• Sections 22A-23 specify matters the court or authorised officer "must consider" in considering s 22 matters. These include the nature and seriousness of the offence, community ties, effect on family/dependants, compliance history, strength of the case, need for protection, period and conditions of custody, whether the person was on bail at the time of the offence, behaviour toward primary victims, whether it is a family violence offence, and likelihood of family violence and its management (s 22A).

• Cohort-specific "must consider" prescriptions include the factors in ss 22B (Indigenous persons), 22C (people with disability or health conditions), 22D (children) and 23 (pregnant people).

Rights and entitlements created or clarified

• Right of victims to express concerns and provide information: Section 23A(1) allows a victim to express concern about need for protection to a "relevant justice agency" and allows a primary victim to provide any other information to that agency. The statute also recognises victim representatives and permits them to act under s 23A(4).

• Victim representation: The "victim representative" definition grants specific people the right to represent a primary victim’s concerns or give information under s 23A, including persons nominated in writing by the primary victim (s 21).

• Consideration in bail decisions: Accused persons of specified cohorts (children, Indigenous persons, people with disability, pregnant persons) gain procedural protections insofar as decision-makers are required to consider specific matters relevant to safety, welfare and cultural connections (ss 22B-22D, 23).

Duties without explicit enforcement mechanisms in the Bill

• The Bill uses mandatory language ("must") for many duties but does not itself create a penalty scheme in the inserted text for breaches of the new obligations (for instance, failure by an informant to disclose family violence order information or failure by a relevant justice agency to take all reasonable steps to ask victims). Those failures would therefore likely be enforceable through existing administrative, professional or judicial review mechanisms rather than through newly created offences within this Bill. The Bill's text does not insert express sanctions or penalty provisions for non-compliance with the new duties.

Practical consequences of duties and rights

• The "must consider" obligations require decision-makers to engage with a wider evidentiary and assessment record and to articulate reasons addressing listed matters, which will influence how bail hearings are conducted and how bail conditions are framed. The prosecutor's "must" duty in s 23A(2)(a)(ii) constrains prosecutorial discretion in specified circumstances to ensure courts receive victim-expressed concerns.

• The changes create procedural rights for victims to be heard indirectly through the DPP or police and to nominate representatives to act on their behalf. The Bill does not, however, create an express right for victims to be present in bail hearings or to challenge bail decisions; rather it creates input pathways and obligations to consider such input.

The Bill introduces multiple mandatory duties, but the text of the Bill itself does not create new criminal penalties or administrative fines tied specifically to breach of the newly inserted "must" obligations. Enforcement therefore relies on existing legal mechanisms and the operation of duties within the criminal justice process.

Express enforcement measures in the Bill

• No new penalty provisions: The Bill contains many "must" and "must consider" prescriptions (e.g. new ss 15(1A), 19(2A), 22, 22A-22D, 23, 23A), but it does not add express penalty clauses to sanction non-compliance with these duties within the Bail Act text inserted by this Bill.

Existing mechanisms that operate to enforce or give effect to duties

• Judicial oversight and review: Courts retain supervisory jurisdiction over decision-making, and existing judicial review and appellate procedures will apply to decisions where non-compliance with statutory duties is alleged. Because the Bill places several mandatory duties on decision-makers to consider specified factors, affected parties can seek judicial review or appellate intervention for alleged failures to consider mandatory matters, incorrect application of the statutory framework, or breaches of procedural duty. The Bill itself does not specify the remedies, but the general law of administrative and judicial review, and the Bail Act’s pre-existing enforcement framework, will apply.

• Obligation-based enforcement through professional processes: Prosecutors and police are subject to internal professional accountability, policy directions and, where applicable, public sector disciplinary regimes. The Bill’s "must" obligations on informants and prosecutors therefore intersect with existing accountability frameworks rather than creating a new statutory penalty regime.

Statutory obligations that create practical enforcement pressures

• Prosecutor "must" to make submissions where victims ask the court to be informed (new s 23A(2)(a)(ii)) is a direction that will be operationalised through prosecutorial practice and court procedure. Failure to comply could be raised in court and may attract professional or operational consequences though the Bill does not specify statutory sanctions.

• Information-sharing duties on informants (new ss 15(1A), 19(2A)) will be enforced practically via police and court processes. A failure to supply family violence order information could affect the integrity of a bail decision and be the basis for court scrutiny.

Notice and victim liaison duties

• The Bill changes the identity of persons who may perform victim liaison functions for notification under s 47A and augments the Victims of Crime Act duty to take all reasonable steps to ask victims about protection concerns (Schedule 1). These duties will be operationalised by police and prosecutorial units; the Bill does not prescribe formal penalties for breach but non-compliance may be the subject of complaint, review or be raised in related proceedings.

Implications of absence of explicit penalties

• The lack of specific statutory penalties means compliance will depend on administrative implementation, training, system updates (for example to police databases for family violence orders), and oversight through routine court processes. The Bill increases the number of mandatory procedural steps, thereby increasing the opportunities for errors or omissions that could be raised in litigation, but it does not create separate offence provisions for omissions in the text provided.

In summary, enforcement of the Bill’s duties will primarily occur through judicial scrutiny of bail decisions, prosecutorial and police operational processes, and existing accountability frameworks, rather than through new penalty clauses inserted by the Bill.

The Bill explicitly cross-references and modifies interaction with several existing Acts and statutory instruments. The principal interactions are with the Family Violence Act 2016, the Children and Young People Act 2008, the Victims of Crime Act 1994, the Personal Violence Act 2016 and the Court Procedures Act 2004, and with existing provisions within the Bail Act 1992 itself.

Family Violence Act 2016

• The Bill requires informants to provide information about whether a family violence order has been made under the Family Violence Act 2016 to authorised officers and courts (new ss 15(1A), 19(2A)). Schedule 1, Part 1.1 amends the Family Violence Act 2016 Schedule 1, table 1.2 by inserting a new item which specifies that "information given to an authorised officer under the Bail Act 1992, section 15(1A) or to a court under that Act, section 19(2A)" is a specified category for the purposes of the Family Violence Act’s information provisions. This creates a statutory channel for family violence order information to be supplied to Bail Act decision-makers.

Children and Young People Act 2008

• The Bill adopts "child welfare law" as defined in the Children and Young People Act 2008, s 640 for part 4 of the Bail Act and requires decision-makers to follow youth justice principles in s 22D(1)(a) (the "principles in the Children and Young People Act 2008, section 94 (Youth justice principles)"). Section 22D also requires courts to consider reports ordered under the Court Procedures Act 2004, s 74D when such a report has been given to the court, creating a procedural link between youth justice report processes and bail decisions for children.

Victims of Crime Act 1994

• Schedule 1, Part 1.2 substitutes s 17(1) of the Victims of Crime Act to require that "if a court or an authorised officer is considering whether to grant bail to, or is reviewing a bail decision for, an accused person, a relevant justice agency must take all reasonable steps to ask a victim whether the victim has any concerns about the need for protection from violence or harassment by the accused person." The Bill also inserts definitions and clarifications about family violence and personal violence into that Act (Schedule 1, [1.3]). This aligns victim-consultation duties in the Victims of Crime Act with the new bail procedures.

Personal Violence Act 2016

• The Bill uses the concept of "personal violence" for some of its definitions and victim-related concepts by reference to the Personal Violence Act 2016, section 8 (see s 23A(5) and schedule amendments). That ensures consistency between the scope of "violence or harassment" in the bail context and the Personal Violence Act’s definitional reach.

Court Procedures Act 2004

• For children, the Bill requires courts to consider reports prepared under the Court Procedures Act 2004, s 74D when they are before the court (s 22D(1)(b)). This creates a procedural bridge between report-making powers and the court’s bail decision.

Bail Act 1992 internal interactions and terminology changes

• The Bill substitutes "bail undertaking" for multiple existing references to "undertaking to appear" across the Bail Act (s 22 substitution table). This is a textual harmonisation that will require updating of forms, procedures, and cross-references in instruments exercising powers under the Bail Act. It also inserts definitions in the Bail Act dictionary (ss 16-21) so that concepts used in the Act are given statutory meaning.

Interaction with orders under other Acts as management tools

• The Bill’s examples expressly point to bail conditions under Part 5 of the Bail Act and to orders under the Family Violence Act 2016 (s 22A(k) examples 1 and 2) as options to manage risk of family violence. That signals legislative intent that decision-makers may use orders under the Family Violence Act as part of bail risk management, linking bail practice with family violence statutory remedies.

Information sharing and privacy

• By mandating the provision of family violence order information to authorised officers and courts, and by requiring relevant justice agencies to take reasonable steps to ask victims about protection concerns, the Bill increases the cross-agency flow of sensitive information. The Bill itself does not amend privacy or information-protection regimes, but Schedule 1 explicitly lists family violence order information as a specified category that can be given to authorised officers and courts under the Family Violence Act framework.

In short, the Bill actively weaves bail decision-making into the statutory frameworks governing family violence, youth justice, personal violence and victims’ consultation, by both borrowing definitions from those Acts and creating specific channels for information to flow from those regimes into bail decision-making.

This Bill text is the instrument that effects the amendments described. The Bill itself makes direct substitutions and insertions into the Bail Act 1992 and consequential amendments to other Acts. The Bill records only its own presentation and notification events as endnotes; it does not provide a history of prior amendments beyond those the Bill makes.

Key textual amendments made by the Bill

• Whole-of-section replacements and new sections: The Bill replaces existing ss 22 to 23A with a new suite of sections (s 10), inserts new definitions in s 12A and the Bail Act dictionary (ss 6, 16-21), and inserts procedural obligations at s 15(1A) and s 19(2A) (ss 7 and 9).
• Terminology substitutions: The Bill systematically substitutes the term "bail undertaking" for "undertaking to appear" across numerous provisions and headings (s 22 substitution list in section 22 "Further amendments").
• Consequential amendments: Schedule 1 makes consequential changes to the Family Violence Act 2016 and the Victims of Crime Act 1994 to accommodate new information-sharing and victim-consultation duties (Schedule 1, Parts 1.1 and 1.2).

Dates and commencement

• The Bill provides that the Act commences six months after its notification day (s 2). The endnotes state the presentation speech was made in the Legislative Assembly on 6 May 2026 and that the Bill was notified under the Legislation Act on 2026 (endnotes 1 and 2). The Bill therefore sets an implementation lead time of six months for agencies to prepare for the changes.

Nature of the amendments (mechanical, definitional and procedural)

• Mechanical: Change of terminology (undertaking to appear → bail undertaking) and renumbering/substitution of headings and sections (e.g. s 12A heading replacement) are mechanical and textual.
• Definitional: The Bill inserts or references multiple definitions to bring statutory clarity to terms used in bail decision-making, for example child welfare law, disability, family violence, health condition, harm, primary victim, victim, victim representative, and legally incompetent person (ss 6, 16-21).
• Procedural: Inserts mandatory duties for informants and prosecutors and prescriptive "must consider" lists for decision-makers (new ss 15(1A), 19(2A), 22-23A).

Scope of amendment

• The Bill amends both the substantive decision-making basis for bail and the procedural apparatus around victim consultation and information sharing. It touches directly on police practice, prosecutorial practice, court processes, and interactions with family violence and youth justice frameworks.

Limitations in amendment history provided by the Bill

• The Bill text does not contain transitional or savings provisions that explain how existing bail undertakings or pending matters are to be handled, nor does it set out delegated instrument changes or necessary administrative rule amendments. Agencies will need to draft operational directions and updating forms to align with the amended text.

The Bill itself is therefore the primary and only amendment history contained in the source. Any further history, such as subsequent parliamentary amendments or judicial interpretation, is not in the Bill text.

The Bill text contains no case law, judicial findings or litigation history. It is a legislative amendment and the source does not record any judicial decisions interpreting its provisions. The endnotes record a presentation speech and notification dates (endnotes 1-2), but no litigation or challenge is recorded in the Bill.

Implications for future litigation (based on statutory changes)

• The Bill introduces mandatory considerations and duties that courts and authorised officers must follow. The statutory "must consider" language and the new disclosure duties create legal issues that could be the subject of future judicial review or appeal, for example:
  • Alleged failure by a court or authorised officer to consider a mandatory factor in s 22 or the cohort-specific provisions (ss 22A-22D, 23) could be raised on judicial review or appeal. The Bill itself does not elaborate remedies, but existing appellate and administrative law principles would apply.
  • Alleged failures to supply family violence order information by an informant (new ss 15(1A), 19(2A)) or to take "all reasonable steps" to consult victims under the amended Victims of Crime Act (Schedule 1) could be pleaded as procedural unfairness in a bail decision challenge or as matters relevant to an argument that a bail decision was unlawful for failure to consider relevant materials.
  • The "proof is not required" clauses (ss 22B(2) and 22D(2)) lower the evidentiary thresholds for particular matters to be considered; disputes could arise about the scope and application of this provision and may lead to judicial interpretation.

Absent entries in this Bill

• There are no recorded challenges, case names, or litigation interpretations referenced in the Bill. The Bill is prospective: courts will ultimately provide interpretive guidance once the provisions are in force and applied. The Bill does not include transitional provisions that might themselves have been the subject of litigation in this source material.

In short, there is no litigation history in the source. The Bill’s new mandatory considerations and procedural duties create potential avenues for future judicial engagement that will be resolved in courts after the provisions commence and are operationalised.

This section flags technical points and likely operational pitfalls directly supported by the Bill text. These are not policy evaluations, rather concrete issues practitioners and administrators should note.

1. Mandatory "must" duties without express penalties

   • Several duties are expressed as "must" (for example, an informant must give information about family violence orders at new ss 15(1A) and 19(2A); prosecutors must make submissions in certain victim-requested circumstances at new s 23A(2)(a)(ii)). The Bill does not create explicit statutory penalties for failing to comply with these duties. That means enforcement will be through existing administrative, professional and judicial mechanisms rather than through a bespoke penalty regime in the Bail Act (see new ss 15(1A), 19(2A), 23A).

2. "Proof is not required" clauses

   • For Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, s 22B(2) and for children s 22D(2) state that proof is not required to establish specified facts (for example that Indigenous people have experienced harm in custody disproportionately or that avoidance of custody is in a child’s best interests). That lowers evidentiary thresholds for decision-makers to accept certain contextual matters without requiring particular proof. The practical effect is that courts and authorised officers must accept those matters as matters for consideration, but the Bill does not specify the source or quality of the underlying material the decision-maker should use.

3. Victim representative nomination is in writing but process not prescribed

   • The definition of "victim representative" includes "a person nominated, in writing, by a primary victim" to perform certain functions (s 21(c)). The Bill does not prescribe the form, filing, verification or storage process for such written nominations, nor timeframes for their submission. Practitioners should be attentive to operational guidance that courts and agencies issue to implement nomination and authentication processes.

4. Expanded definitions with potential breadth

   • The Bill defines "harm" to include pregnancy, economic loss and substantial impairment of legal rights (s 18). This extended definition broadens the class of harms decision-makers must consider when assessing victim impact. Practitioners should note that the definition is statutory and must be applied precisely as written.

5. Interaction of bail decision-making and orders under other Acts

   • The Bill’s examples in s 22A(k) point explicitly to bail conditions and Family Violence Act orders as mechanisms to manage family violence risk. However, the Bill does not create a statutory hierarchy or procedure for obtaining Family Violence Act orders within bail proceedings; reliance on such orders will require coordination with the Family Violence Act processes (s 22A examples). Practitioners should ensure processes to seek and evidence such orders are in place.

6. Terminology replacement and cross-references

   • The Bill substitutes "bail undertaking" for many instances of "undertaking to appear" across the Bail Act (s 22 substitution list). This requires updating forms, court templates and automated systems to prevent inconsistent terminology that could create procedural errors or confusion.

7. Who is a "relevant justice agency"

   • Section 23A(5) defines "relevant justice agency" as either the chief police officer or the director of public prosecutions. The Victims of Crime Act amendment (Schedule 1) uses the phrase "relevant justice agency must take all reasonable steps to ask a victim", which requires those agencies to operationalise reasonable-steps processes. The Bill leaves "reasonable steps" undefined, creating potential scope disputes about what suffices as adequate inquiry in any given case.

8. No transitional arrangements specified

   • The Bill makes substantial textual changes to the Bail Act but contains no transitional provisions about existing bail undertakings, pending bail applications, or how to treat indictable offences where elements are proven but sentencing is pending (s 22(3) addresses something different). Administrators will need to craft guidance about how to apply new criteria to in-flight matters.

9. Expanded role for prosecutors but not more resources in text

   • The prosecutor must make certain submissions and may make submissions based on victim information (s 23A(2)). The Bill does not provide funding or resource allocations for the additional workload, so prosecutorial offices will need to absorb procedural costs without statutory resource direction.

10. Victim consultation duty standard,"all reasonable steps"

    • The Victims of Crime Act amendment requires taking "all reasonable steps" to ask victims about protection concerns (Schedule 1). That standard is flexible but operationally uncertain. The courts may be asked to adjudicate whether "all reasonable steps" were taken in particular circumstances, creating risk of review if agencies do not document efforts properly.

These are concrete implementation and legal technicalities that arise from the Bill’s text. They point to areas where procedural guidance, updated forms, training and IT changes will be necessary to reduce operational risk.

This section sets out concrete steps agencies, courts and practitioners must take to implement the Bill’s requirements and to reduce legal and operational risk. Each compliance action maps to specific provisions in the Bill.

1. Update forms, templates and IT systems

   • Replace every instance of "undertaking to appear" with "bail undertaking" in court forms, police charging sheets, bail registers, and IT case management systems (s 22 substitution list; ss 16-17). Ensure all cross-references in electronic and paper workflows match the amended Bail Act dictionary definitions (ss 16-21).

2. Record and disclose family violence order information

   • Police informants must give authorised officers and courts information about whether a family violence order exists against an accused (new ss 15(1A), 19(2A)). Operationally:
     • Update arrest and booking checklists to include explicit checks for Family Violence Act orders and family violence registers.
     • Design a standard disclosure form or data field that records the presence or absence of family violence orders and the date and tenor of any such order.
     • Train frontline police and informants on the statutory duty to give this information to an authorised officer or the court and on confidentiality considerations under the Family Violence Act (Schedule 1 Part 1.1).

3. Victim consultation and "all reasonable steps"

   • Under the amended Victims of Crime Act (Schedule 1, Part 1.2), relevant justice agencies must take "all reasonable steps to ask a victim" whether they have concerns about need for protection during bail decision-making or review. To comply:
     • Draft and adopt an agency-specific procedure that defines what "all reasonable steps" means operationally (e.g. multiple contact attempts, text/e-mail and telephone, voicemail and written notification, outreach through victim liaison officers).
     • Maintain records of attempts, contact outcomes, and any information obtained to demonstrate the "reasonable steps" taken.
     • Ensure victim liaison personnel are trained in the definitions of family violence and personal violence as used in the Bill (Schedule 1 [1.3]).

4. Victim representative nomination and verification

   • Create a standard written nomination form for primary victims to nominate a victim representative (s 21(c)). Include:
     • Verification procedures (signature, date, identity checks).
     • Processes for submission to police, DPP and court registries.
     • Retention and access protocols to ensure victim privacy and that the nominated representative can be engaged promptly when bail matters arise.

5. Prosecutorial practice changes

   • The DPP’s office must operationalise the new prosecutorial obligations:
     • Establish a workflow to ensure that when a victim expresses a concern, prosecutors are promptly informed and are able to make submissions to court. The prosecutor must make a submission where the victim has expressly asked the court to be informed (new s 23A(2)(a)(ii)).
     • Integrate victim information into prosecutorial case files, and create templates for victim-sourced submissions to bail courts addressing s 22 matters.
     • Ensure legal officers are aware that they may make further submissions based on victim information relevant to s 22 and that they must do so where a victim has asked the court to be informed.

6. Bail decision documentation and reasoning

   • Courts and authorised officers must consider and document all mandated factors in ss 22 and 22A-22D and s 23. To comply:
     • Update judicial/authorised officer checklists and judgment templates to require explicit reference to the relevant subsections and factors considered, including cohort-specific matters.
     • For children, ensure best-interests reasoning is front and centre in bail decisions and that any youth justice reports under the Court Procedures Act 2004, s 74D are located and considered where present (s 22D(1)(b)).
     • For Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander persons, document culturally relevant inquiries, and note that proof is not required for certain matters under s 22B(2).

7. Health, disability and support assessments

   • For accused persons with disability or health conditions (s 22C), set up a process to obtain and consider clinical reports or briefings about treatment and support required and the person’s decision-making and communication capacities. Where immediate clinical assessment is not possible, record efforts to secure assessments and how decisional capacity issues were addressed in the interim.

8. Pregnancy considerations

   • For pregnant accused persons, create a standard checklist for bail decision-makers to document consideration of the likely effect of custody and bail conditions on the pregnant person and the unborn child (s 23).

9. Inter-agency coordination and referral protocols

   • Because s 22A(k) references using bail conditions and family violence orders to manage risk, agencies should agree protocols for:
     • How and when Family Violence Act orders can be sought in tandem with bail processes.
     • Referral pathways from police to family violence services and to the DPP where victims express protection concerns.
     • Fast-track mechanisms, where appropriate, to ensure protective actions are available in a timeframe usable by bail decision-makers.

10. Training and resourcing

    • Conduct mandatory training for police informants, authorised officers who take bail decisions, prosecutors, victim liaison officers, and court registry staff on:
      • The new statutory framework, specific duties and examples in s 22A(k).
      • How to collect, preserve and communicate victim-provided information under s 23A.
      • The new definitions in the Bail Act dictionary including "harm", "primary victim", "victim representative" and "bail undertaking".
    • Document resource needs for increased victim liaison work and additional prosecutorial submissions, and plan internal resource allocation accordingly.

11. Data capture and audit trails

    • Capture and retain audit trails for: family violence order checks and disclosures; victim contact attempts and responses; prosecutor submissions made in response to victim requests; and judicial records evidencing consideration of required factors. These records will assist in compliance demonstration and reduce review risk.

12. Timing and commencement planning

    • The Bill commences six months after notification day (s 2). Agencies should use the six-month lead time to:
      • Update operational policies and forms.
      • Implement IT updates and data-field changes.
      • Publish guidance for practitioners and public-facing materials for victims explaining nomination of victim representatives and how to express concerns.

13. Privacy and confidentiality alignment

    • Review existing privacy protocols and information-sharing authorisations to ensure sensitive victim and family violence information transmitted to authorised officers and courts complies with existing privacy, information protection and Family Violence Act constraints, noting Schedule 1 makes family violence information a permitted exchange category.

These compliance steps are grounded in the Bill’s text. Implementation will require cross-agency coordination and documented internal policies to satisfy the new "must" duties and to ensure decisions and actions are properly recorded.