The Bill’s operative concepts are defined and structured across ss 221G-221I and then supported by procedural sections. Key definitions and conceptual building blocks are:

• Disseminate and material (s 221G). “Disseminate” is expressly defined to include broadcasting, communicating, exhibiting, selling, sending, supplying, transmitting or publishing material by electronic or other means, including social media, and to include making material available for access by another person (s 221G, paragraphs (a) and (b)). “Material” is given a broad definition that includes objects, pictures, photographs, film, written or printed matter, data and “any thing from which text, pictures, sound or data can be produced or reproduced” (s 221G).

• Relevant offence (s 221H). The conduct depicted must constitute a “relevant offence” which the Bill defines by reference to offences against particular chapters of the Criminal Code (Chapters IX, XI, 11A, XXX, XXXVI, XXXVIII, XXXIX, XLIV and XLVI), specified sections of the Road Traffic Act 1974 (ss 59, 59A, 59BA, 60, 60A, 61, 62 and 62A) and any offence prescribed by regulation (s 221H(1)). The definition is extended to comparable offences under Commonwealth or foreign law if the act or omission would have constituted a relevant offence if it occurred in Western Australia (s 221H(2)).

• Offence elements (s 221I). The statutory offence requires proof of (a) dissemination of material, (b) that the material depicts conduct constituting a relevant offence, and (c) that a reasonable person would consider the material or its dissemination is likely to humiliate, intimidate or victimise a victim of the relevant offence or is likely to be offensive or demeaning to a person or group, or that the material was likely disseminated for one of the specified purposes in s 221I(3). The specified purposes are increasing reputation or notoriety of the perpetrator, boasting, glorifying, or encouraging others to engage in similar conduct (s 221I(3)). The section expressly allows prosecution regardless of whether anyone has been prosecuted or convicted of the underlying relevant offence (s 221I(4)).

• Defences and evidentiary posture (s 221J). The Act provides enumerated defences including dissemination for genuine scientific, educational, academic, artistic, literary, satirical or entertainment purposes; dissemination by a journalist or news publisher in the course of their activities; the depiction being fictional or artificially created; dissemination to warn, complain about or denounce the conduct; dissemination reasonably necessary for legal proceedings, assisting law enforcement or making insurance claims or otherwise reasonably necessary in the circumstances; and dissemination in the public interest (s 221J(1)). The subsection on journalists and news publishers sets out matters the court may consider when determining the status of a person or entity (ss 221J(2)-(3)), and these matters are non‑exhaustive.

• Exceptions for official actors (s 221K). Members and officers of law enforcement agencies and intelligence agencies do not contravene the offence where the act is done in good faith in performance of official duties (s 221K(2)). Good faith in the course of official duties connected with administration of justice and investigation of offences is also an exception (s 221K(3)). The Bill defines “law enforcement agency” by reference to a list including the State Police Force, State Police Service, Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and Corruption and Crime Commission, and comparable entities in other jurisdictions (s 221G).

• Court powers for rectification and ancillary procedural measures (ss 221L-221N, 221O-221P). Courts may order removal, retraction, recovery, deletion, destruction or forfeiture to the State of material connected to the charge (s 221L(2)). The court may act on its own initiative or on application by the prosecutor (s 221L(3)). Rectification orders may be made whether or not the person is convicted (s 221L(4)). Failure to comply without reasonable excuse is an offence with specified penalties (s 221L(7)). The Bill provides for revocation and replacement of orders (s 221M), revocation by the court that made the order (s 221N), limitation on appeals from certain decisions (s 221O), and that prosecutions under the Chapter may be commenced at any time (s 221P). It also disapplies Interpretation Act 1984 s 71 for the Chapter (s 221Q).

These concepts are interactive. The “reasonable person” component in s 221I(2)(c) operates as an objective standard overlaid onto intent and purpose provisions in s 221I(3). The defences in s 221J require proof (the section frames them as defences a person may prove) and the court is given discretion to consider non‑exhaustive factors in assessing whether an actor is a journalist or a news publisher (ss 221J(2)-(3)). Court discretion over rectification orders is broad, including power to act on the prosecutor’s oral application or on its own motion (s 221L(3)). The Bill therefore creates both criminal liability and a parallel remedial regime with mandatory compliance obligations that exist independent of conviction (s 221L(4)).

The statutory provisions use the generic term “person” as the actor who may commit the offence by disseminating material (s 221I). That scope is deliberately broad because the Bill defines dissemination to include a wide range of actions and media, explicitly including electronic means and social media (s 221G). Practical categories of affected actors identifiable from the text include:

• Individual communicators and publishers. Any natural person who broadcasts, publishes, transmits or otherwise supplies material as defined in s 221G may be prosecuted under s 221I if the material depicts a relevant offence and meets the “reasonable person” criteria in s 221I(2)(c). The Bill does not exempt private individuals from the offence; it creates an offence applicable to “a person” without qualification.

• Commercial or organisational publishers and platforms. The definition of “disseminate” includes making material available for access by electronic or other means including social media (s 221G). The Bill’s structure and its separate consideration of “news publisher” in s 221J(3) anticipate that entities engaged in publishing and broadcasting will be within scope if they disseminate relevant material. The court is given factors to determine whether an entity is a news publisher including whether the entity is engaged in the business of publishing or broadcasting news to the public or a section of the public and whether it complies with recognised professional standards or codes of practice (s 221J(3)). The text does not carve out intermediary platforms; any entity that disseminates material as defined is captured unless a defence or exception applies.

• Journalists and news publishers (potentially protected by defence). The Bill provides a specific defence where the material was disseminated by a journalist or a news publisher in the course of their activities (s 221J(1)(b)). The court may, on a non‑exhaustive list of matters, determine whether a person is a journalist (s 221J(2)) or an entity is a news publisher (s 221J(3)). Those lists include regular engagement in gathering and assessing information about matters of public interest and compliance with recognised professional standards. The status of an actor as a journalist or news publisher is therefore a judicial question informed by the statutory factors.

• Victims and victim representational groups. The definition of “victim” in s 221I(1) is broad, covering persons who have suffered injury, loss or damage as a direct result of the relevant offence and, where the victim died, a defined class of relatives and persons connected under customary law (s 221I(1)(a)-(b)). The material element of the offence focuses in part on likely impact on a victim, specifically whether a reasonable person would consider the material or its dissemination likely to humiliate, intimidate or victimise a victim (s 221I(2)(c)(i)).

• Law enforcement and intelligence officers. Section 221K(2) provides that members or officers of law enforcement agencies or intelligence agencies do not contravene s 221I(2) where the act would otherwise constitute the offence if done in good faith in the performance of official duties. “Law enforcement agency” is defined by reference to listed State agencies and similar entities from other jurisdictions (s 221G). The Bill also protects persons acting in good faith in the course of official duties connected with administration of justice, including investigation (s 221K(3)).

• Persons charged with an offence under the Chapter. Those charged are subject to court power to make rectification orders against them for the material connected to the charge (s 221L(1)-(4)), and failure to comply with such an order without reasonable excuse is an offence (s 221L(7)). Courts can impose such orders even before conviction and can act on their own initiative (s 221L(2)-(4)).

• Prosecutors and courts. The Bill explicitly contemplates prosecutorial participation in applications for rectification orders, including oral applications (s 221L(3)(b)), and gives courts discretion to make, revoke or replace orders, including on their own initiative (ss 221L(3)(a), 221M and 221N). Certain decisions about rectification orders and revocations are made unappealable (s 221O).

Who pays and who decides. The person who is found to have committed the offence or to have failed to comply with a rectification order faces imprisonment and fines as specified in the Bill (s 221I, s 221L(7)), and courts are the decision makers for charges, rectification orders, revocations and replacements (ss 221L-221N). Prosecutors may initiate rectification applications orally (s 221L(3)(b)) and are the respondent to an application to revoke an order when the person subject to the order applies (s 221N(4)).

The statutory design places a practical compliance and litigation exposure on anyone who publishes or makes available material that depicts conduct falling within the statutory catalogue (s 221H). Whether an actor is excused or entitled to a defence requires judicial assessment under the statutory tests (s 221J, s 221K).

The Bill creates duties, criminal liabilities and procedural rights centred on dissemination, rectification and the availability of particular defences. The statutory duties and rights flow largely from ss 221I, 221J and 221L-221N and can be summarised and tied to sections in the Bill.

Duties and obligations

• Duty not to disseminate qualifying material (s 221I). A person must not disseminate material that depicts a relevant offence and meets the objective “reasonable person” standards in s 221I(2)(c). The duty exists as a criminal prohibition carrying a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment where the elements are proved (s 221I(2)).

• Duty to comply with rectification orders (s 221L(2)-(7)). If a court makes an order under s 221L(2), the person ordered must take the reasonable actions specified to remove, retract, recover, delete, destroy or forfeit to the State any material to which the charge relates within the period specified. Compliance is mandatory unless the person has a reasonable excuse. Non‑compliance attracts a separate criminal sanction (s 221L(7)) including imprisonment, a fixed fine and a daily fine (s 221L(7)(a)-(b)). The daily fine does not apply to a child at the time the order was made (s 221L(8)).

• Ongoing duty to respond to court processes. Courts may make rectification orders on their own motion (s 221L(3)(a)) or on an oral application by the prosecutor (s 221L(3)(b)). The obligation to attend to such applications and the possibility of orders arising before conviction (s 221L(4)) create practical duties for defendants and entities to engage promptly with court directions and orders.

Rights and procedural protections

• Defences available (s 221J). The Act lists multiple defensive bases a defendant may prove: dissemination for genuine scientific, educational, academic, artistic, literary, satirical or entertainment purposes (s 221J(1)(a)); dissemination by a journalist or news publisher in the course of their activities (s 221J(1)(b)); depiction being fictional or artificially created (s 221J(1)(c)); dissemination to warn, complain about or denounce the conduct (s 221J(1)(d)); dissemination reasonably necessary for legal proceedings, reporting to a law enforcement agency or making an insurance claim, or otherwise reasonably necessary in the circumstances (s 221J(1)(e)); and dissemination in the public interest (s 221J(1)(f)). The section frames these as defences a person may prove to avoid criminal liability.

• Judicial determination of status (ss 221J(2)-(3)). The court may consider non‑exhaustive matters in determining whether a person is a journalist or whether an entity is a news publisher. These factors include regular engagement in gathering, assessing and preparing information about matters of public interest, and compliance with recognised professional standards or codes of practice. The provision therefore recognises that status as journalist or news publisher is a judicial question based on facts.

• Court discretion and applications (ss 221L-221N). Courts have discretionary powers to make rectification orders, revoke them, or replace them (ss 221L, 221M, 221N). A court must have regard to other similar obligations the person is under in relation to the material when considering whether to make a rectification order (s 221L(5)). Courts may also act on their own initiative in making or revoking orders; the prosecutor may apply orally for such orders (ss 221L(3), 221N(3)(b)).

• Procedural limits on appeals (s 221O). The Bill makes certain decisions under ss 221L(2), 221M(2)(a) or (b) or (3)(b)(i) or 221N(2) non‑appealable (s 221O). That limits the ordinary appellate recourse in respect of those enumerated decisions.

Operational interplays that affect duties and rights

• No dependence on conviction (s 221I(4), s 221L(4)). The offence in s 221I can be prosecuted whether or not anyone has been prosecuted or convicted for the underlying relevant offence (s 221I(4)). Separately, rectification orders can be made whether or not the person is convicted of the dissemination offence (s 221L(4)). Those provisions create a separation between liability for the underlying act depicted and liability for dissemination; they also create rights and duties that can crystallise before the conclusion of underlying criminal proceedings.

• Time for prosecution (s 221P) and Interpretation Act disapplication (s 221Q). A prosecution may be commenced at any time (s 221P). The Bill also disapplies Interpretation Act 1984 s 71 for the Chapter (s 221Q). Together those provisions alter the ordinary temporal constraints applicable to criminal proceedings that might otherwise be governed by general limitation rules, thereby affecting the substantive and procedural rights and duties in long‑run matters.

Who decides and who enforces

• Courts decide guilt, impose sentences and make rectification orders (ss 221I, 221L-221N). The prosecutor initiates charges and may apply for rectification orders, including orally (s 221L(3)(b)). Law enforcement agencies as defined in s 221G are named entities for exception purposes (s 221K) and for prosecutorial roles under s 221N.

These duties, rights and procedural arrangements place on defendants the obligation to prove available defences and on courts the discretion to make preventive or remedial orders quickly and authoritatively, with constrained appeal routes for certain decisions and no time bar on commencement of prosecutions.

The Bill establishes criminal penalties for both the primary dissemination offence and for failure to obey rectification orders, and it gives courts broad remedial and enforcement powers to control material through orders, revocations and replacements. The penalties and enforcement mechanisms specified in the text are as follows.

Primary offence penalty

• Dissemination offence. The principal offence under s 221I(2) carries a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment (s 221I(2)). That is the sole specified penalty in the section for the substantive criminal offence created by the Bill.

Rectification order enforcement and sanctions

• Court power to order rectification (s 221L(2)). The court may order the person charged to take reasonable actions to remove, retract, recover, delete, destroy or forfeit to the State any material to which the charge relates within a specified period.

• Ability to make orders before conviction (s 221L(4)). A rectification order may be made whether or not the person is convicted of the offence. This means enforcement obligations can be imposed pre‑conviction.

• Penalty for failure to comply (s 221L(7)). A person who, without reasonable excuse, fails to comply with a rectification order commits an offence. The prescribed penalty is imprisonment for 12 months and a fine of $12,000 (s 221L(7)(a)), plus a daily fine of $200 for each day or part of a day during which the offence continues (s 221L(7)(b)). The daily penalty does not apply where the person is a child at the time the order is made (s 221L(8)).

• Continued effect, revocation and replacement (ss 221M-221N). If the person is convicted of failing to comply with a rectification order that remains unperformed at the time of conviction, the convicting court may revoke the order or revoke and make a new order (s 221M(2)). If the convicting court does not act, the order continues to have effect and the period is taken to be that specified by the court or, if not, 14 days from the day of conviction (s 221M(3)). The court that made the order may revoke it if satisfied there is good reason (s 221N(2)). Courts may act on their own initiative or on application by prosecuting authority or the person subject to the order (s 221N(3)).

Procedural enforcement features

• Prosecutorial role in applications (ss 221L(3), 221N(3)(b)(i)). Prosecutors may apply orally for rectification orders and are the respondent where the person subject to an order applies to revocation (s 221N(4)).

• Non‑appealability of certain decisions (s 221O). The Bill expressly provides that no appeal lies from certain enumerated decisions relating to rectification orders and revocations (s 221O). The enumerated decisions include decisions under s 221L(2), s 221M(2)(a) or (b) or (3)(b)(i) and s 221N(2). This limits appellate review over some enforcement actions.

• Interaction with other enforcement powers (s 221L(6)). Section 221L(6) states that s 221L does not limit a court’s powers under s 731 or under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act 2000. The Bill therefore leaves open other existing enforcement or property confiscation powers that a court might deploy in relation to the same material, though the Bill itself does not specify operational arrangements for using those powers together.

Temporal and jurisdictional enforcement

• No time limit on prosecutions (s 221P). A prosecution for an offence against a provision of the Chapter may be commenced at any time. This removes any ordinary time bar that might otherwise limit prosecutions for offences in this Chapter.

• Extraterritorial importation of conduct (s 221H(2)). Conduct that constituted an offence under Commonwealth or foreign law is a “relevant offence” where the act or omission would have constituted a relevant offence if it had occurred in Western Australia. That means material depicting conduct that occurred outside Western Australia may still give rise to liability if the conduct would meet the relevant offence catalogue.

Operational and enforcement consequence summary

• The Bill creates criminal consequences both for primary dissemination (term of imprisonment) and for disobedience to court‑ordered rectification (term of imprisonment, fixed monetary fine and accruing daily fine). Courts may impose rectification orders before conviction, on their own initiative, and certain decisions are not appealable. Prosecutors are empowered to obtain orders orally and to respond to revocation applications. The lack of a time bar for prosecutions (s 221P) means enforcement action can be commenced at any time, and the disapplication of Interpretation Act s 71 (s 221Q) may affect how temporal and interpretive rules apply in practice. Courts retain capacity to use other seizure and confiscation powers in concert with the rectification order power (s 221L(6)).

The Bill cross‑references and modifies interaction with a number of existing statutory regimes through express references, definitions and disapplications. The text frames those interactions directly rather than presuming external legal overlay. The principal intersections in the Bill are as follows.

References inside the Criminal Code and to other State legislation

• Amendment to The Criminal Code. The Bill amends The Criminal Code by inserting Chapter 26B into Part IV (s 4). All operative provisions of the Bill therefore sit within the Criminal Code framework and procedure for criminal offences and sentencing.

• Relevant offence catalogue (s 221H). The Bill ties the dissemination offence to a specific catalogue of substantive offences elsewhere in law by reference to particular Criminal Code chapters , Chapters IX, XI, 11A, XXX, XXXVI, XXXVIII, XXXIX, XLIV and XLVI (s 221H(1)(a)) , and to specified sections of the Road Traffic Act 1974 (s 221H(1)(b)). The Bill also allows regulation to prescribe additional relevant offences (s 221H(1)(c)). By referencing these provisions, the Bill locates liability for dissemination in relation to particular kinds of underlying criminal conduct.

• Cross‑reference to the Bail Act 1982 (s 221L(1)(b)). Section 221L(1)(b) expressly notes the court may make rectification orders in any proceedings for or relating to the charge, including proceedings under the Bail Act 1982. That positions rectification order applications within the range of pre‑trial processes that a court may supervise.

Interaction with Commonwealth law

• Intelligence agency definition (s 221K(1)). The Bill defines “intelligence agency” by reference to the meaning in Crimes Act 1914 (Commonwealth) s 15K (s 221K(1)). That reference ties the Bill’s exceptions for intelligence agencies in s 221K(2) to the Commonwealth statutory definition, aligning the Bill’s exception with Commonwealth nomenclature.

• Relevant offence under other jurisdictions (s 221H(2)). The catalogue of relevant offences is extended to offences under Commonwealth or foreign law where the act or omission would have amounted to a relevant offence had it occurred in Western Australia. That provision imports conduct defined under other jurisdictions into the Chapter’s scope when the substantive act would meet the WA definition.

Interpretation and procedural statutes

• Disapplication of Interpretation Act 1984 s 71 (s 221Q). The Bill expressly disapplies s 71 of the Interpretation Act 1984 for the purposes of this Chapter. Section 71 of the Interpretation Act relates to application of interpretation provisions, and its disapplication indicates the Chapter should be read and applied without reliance on that particular interpretive provision as if it applied. The Bill does not specify the precise practical consequence of the disapplication; that is a matter of statutory interpretation and court application using other interpretive instruments.

• Other court powers preserved (s 221L(6)). Section 221L(6) preserves a court’s powers under s 731 of the Criminal Code and under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act 2000. Section 731 is not quoted in the Bill, but the Bill’s language makes clear that rectification orders do not curtail judicial use of other property seizure or confiscation powers. Practically, that leaves open multi‑modal enforcement responses where confiscation or other measures might also be invoked.

Procedural and remedial interaction

• Rectification powers and pre‑conviction orders (s 221L(4)). The Bill allows rectification orders to be made whether or not there has been a conviction for the dissemination offence. This creates an interaction between remedial court powers and the criminal process; remedial obligations can be imposed on a defendant notwithstanding that the underlying criminal liability remains to be determined.

• Non‑appealability of certain orders (s 221O). By excluding appeals from specified decisions, the Bill modifies ordinary appellate pathways that might otherwise arise under general criminal procedure and appeal statutes. The specific decisions are listed in s 221O and relate to rectification orders and their revocation or replacement.

Regulatory and future‑facing interaction

• Regulations may add relevant offences (s 221H(1)(c)). The Bill contemplates future regulation expanding the list of “relevant offences”. That creates a regulatory interaction where subordinate legislation could broaden the substantive catalogue without primary amendment to the Criminal Code, shifting the scope of application through the regulations.

Scope limits and cross‑jurisdictional reach

• Extraterritorial conduct (s 221H(2)). The Bill permits conduct that occurred under Commonwealth or foreign law to be treated as a “relevant offence” where it would have been a relevant offence in Western Australia. That creates potential cross‑jurisdictional reach for the dissemination offence.

Taken together, the Bill embeds the new dissemination offence within a network of existing criminal, traffic, intelligence and property laws through express references. It also leaves certain interpretive and procedural interactions to judicial elaboration because it disapplies a particular interpretive provision (s 221Q), preserves other judicial powers (s 221L(6)), and permits regulatory augmentation of the list of relevant offences (s 221H(1)(c)).

The document before you is a Bill, and its text records the mechanical amendments proposed to The Criminal Code rather than a past amendment sequence. The Bill amends The Criminal Code by inserting a new Chapter 26B into Part IV. The specific amendment steps in the Bill are:

• Short title and commencement (ss 1-2). Sections 1 and 2 provide the Bill’s short title, “Criminal Code Amendment (Post and Boast Offence) Act 2025”, and the commencement regime. Sections 1 and 2 commence on Royal Assent (s 2(a)); the remainder of the Act comes into operation on a day fixed by proclamation (s 2(b)).

• Amendment provision (s 3). Section 3 states that the Act amends The Criminal Code.

• Insertion of Chapter 26B (s 4). Section 4 effects the substantive amendment by inserting Chapter 26B , “Disseminating material about particular offending conduct” , at the end of Part IV. The text of the chapter comprises ss 221G through 221Q and sets out the definitions, offence, defences, exceptions, rectification order regime, revocation and replacement processes, appeal limits, time for prosecution, and disapplication of Interpretation Act s 71.

What the Bill changes mechanically

• Adds defined terminology. The Bill introduces definitions for “disseminate”, “law enforcement agency”, “material”, “relevant offence” and other terms (s 221G). Those definitions are new entries in the Code’s statutory vocabulary.

• Introduces a new standalone offence and attendant maximum penalty. The Bill inserts s 221I creating the new criminal offence of disseminating material that depicts a relevant offence subject to an objective “reasonable person” impact test; the penalty is imprisonment for three years (s 221I(2)).

• Introduces a court‑based rectification and remedial regime. The Bill gives courts express power to make rectification orders in relation to persons charged and proceedings related to a dissemination charge, allows such orders to be made pre‑conviction, and prescribes penalties for non‑compliance (ss 221L-221M).

• Provides procedural modifications. The Bill limits appeal rights with respect to specified rectification decisions (s 221O), removes time limits on prosecutions for Chapter offences (s 221P), and disapplies Interpretation Act s 71 for the Chapter (s 221Q).

Limitations of the amendment history here

• The Bill text itself does not include prior amendment details or past legislative history. It records the proposed change in terms of textual insertion (s 4). The Bill contains no retrospective amendment schedule beyond the commencement provisions and no transitional or savings provisions beyond those in the inserted Chapter. It does not, for example, specify transitional arrangements for material disseminated before commencement, nor does it specify whether regulations are in draft to implement s 221H(1)(c). Those omissions are matters the Bill leaves implicit.

• Regulatory delegation potential. Because s 221H(1)(c) permits the regulations to prescribe additional relevant offences, the Bill contemplates subordinate legislation that may alter scope without further primary amendment. The Bill itself does not include any such regulations.

In short, the amendment history contained in this Bill is prospective and limited to the text of the new Chapter and the commencement mechanics. The Bill effects a textual insertion to create a new offence and remedial machinery in The Criminal Code.

The Bill as supplied contains no litigation history. It is a legislative text proposing to amend The Criminal Code and does not record any court decisions, judicial interpretations, prior rulings, or litigation outcomes. The Bill’s provisions, including the new offence, defences, rectification order powers and non‑appealable determinations, are framed as statutory law that will commence and thereafter be subject to litigation once enacted and operational in courts.

What the Bill itself indicates about likely areas of litigation

• Questions of statutory construction. Several provisions invite judicial construction and will likely be litigated once cases arise, although the Bill does not include any judicial decisions. Examples include the interpretation of the “reasonable person” standard in s 221I(2)(c), the scope of the purposive tests in s 221I(3), and the meaning and thresholds for “reasonably necessary” and “public interest” in s 221J(1)(e)-(f).

• Status determinations for journalists and publishers. Sections 221J(2)-(3) provide non‑exhaustive lists of factors for determining whether an individual is a journalist or an entity a news publisher. Those lists are inherently fact‑sensitive and will generate litigation about whether particular actors meet the statutory tests in specific circumstances.

• Good faith exceptions. Section 221K provides exceptions for law enforcement and intelligence officers acting in “good faith” in performance of official duties. The definition of “good faith” and the factual scope of “performance of official duties” could invite litigation, but the Bill contains no cases analysing these phrases.

• Rectification order powers and appeal limits. Section 221L allows courts to make rectification orders on their own initiative and s 221O limits appeals from certain enumerated decisions. Those provisions may be the subject of litigation testing the extent of judicial discretion, the procedural fairness applicable to the making of rectification orders, and the constitutional or procedural implications of restricting appellate review, but again, no litigation history is in the Bill.

• Extraterritorial and cross‑jurisdictional scope. Section 221H(2) brings conduct under Commonwealth or foreign law within the catalogue of relevant offences where it would have constituted a relevant offence in Western Australia. The application of that provision to cross‑border conduct and the evidentiary and jurisdictional implications may be litigated.

Absent recorded decisions

• The Bill supplies none of the above. There is no reported case law, no judicial guidance, and no examples of operational enforcement in the text. Any litigation history will necessarily arise only after the chapter is enacted and cases proceed through the State’s courts. The Bill therefore leaves to future litigation the development of doctrines such as how courts interpret “reasonable person” in this context, how they apply defences such as “public interest”, and how rectification powers interact with other judicial and statutory powers.

Because the Bill includes express limitations on appeal for some decisions (s 221O), the pattern and scope of litigation, and the avenues for appellate correction, will have statutory contours determined by those provisions once the law is in force.

The Bill contains several statutory features that create practical legal, procedural and compliance risks and ambiguities to be managed. Below is a focused list of effects and friction points the text itself creates, with direct textual anchors.

1. Objective “reasonable person” test tied to diverse outcomes (s 221I(2)(c)). The offence requires that “a reasonable person would consider” the material or its dissemination is likely to humiliate, intimidate or victimise a victim, or be offensive or demeaning, or was likely disseminated for specified purposes. The Bill does not define “reasonable person” further. That objective test may generate litigation on community standards, the reach of the “likely” threshold, and the application across different media and audiences.

2. Purposes listed in s 221I(3) are mens rea-adjacent but not framed strictly as subjective intent. The statutory element in s 221I(2)(c)(iii) allows the reasonable person standard to be satisfied if the material was likely disseminated for the purposes in s 221I(3) (increasing reputation or notoriety, boasting, glorifying, encouraging others). The interaction between the objective “reasonable person” standard and the purposive list will require court work to determine whether proof of purpose requires subjective proof or may be inferred objectively from the dissemination.

3. Defences are broad but largely factual and for the accused to prove (s 221J(1)). The text frames these as defences a person “may prove”. Each enumerated defence (public interest, genuine academic, artistic, etc., reporter/news publisher, legal necessity) will operate factually and may require evidence of good faith, professional standards, or necessity. For journalists and news publishers, the court may consider compliance with recognised professional standards (ss 221J(2)-(3)), which are not defined and therefore may be contested in evidence.

4. Rectification orders can be made pre‑conviction and on the court’s own initiative (s 221L(2)-(4)). Courts may impose obligations to remove or delete material before any finding of guilt. This procedural feature can result in rapid takedown obligations; the Bill does not prescribe specific safeguards such as interim evidentiary thresholds, nor does it require notice periods beyond what the court may set. The lack of a requirement for prior conviction to compel remedial action will be operationally material for publishers and platforms.

5. Non‑appealability of certain decisions (s 221O). The Bill prohibits appeals from decisions under s 221L(2), ss 221M(2)(a) or (b) or (3)(b)(i), and s 221N(2). Those non‑appealable categories remove appellate review for important remedial orders. Identifying exactly which judicial determinations are caught will be critical in practice and may itself be the subject of litigation.

6. No time limit for prosecutions (s 221P) combined with disapplication of Interpretation Act s 71 (s 221Q). The absence of a limitation period means exposure to prosecution persists indefinitely. The disapplication of s 71 of the Interpretation Act may have interpretive consequences about commencement and retroactivity or about the application of general interpretive provisions; practitioners will need to be alert to how courts treat s 221Q in practice.

7. Daily fines and custodial penalties for non‑compliance (s 221L(7)). Non‑compliance with rectification orders attracts a daily fine of $200 per day in addition to a fixed fine and up to 12 months imprisonment. The law specifies that the daily fine does not apply to children (s 221L(8)), but otherwise the daily accrual can be costly. The Bill does not state to whom monetary fines are paid or how enforcement of monetary sanctions is implemented beyond the label “fine”.

8. Ambiguity around who counts as a “news publisher” or “journalist” (ss 221J(2)-(3)). The non‑exhaustive lists of factors leave room for contestation in the court room for bloggers, freelancers, independent analysts, and small‑scale publishers. Entities such as social media intermediaries, aggregators, or platform algorithms are not expressly discussed and may not fit the provided factors neatly.

9. Interaction with other enforcement powers (s 221L(6)). Section 221L(6) preserves court powers under s 731 and under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act 2000. The parallel availability of confiscation and rectification remedies may result in overlapping processes, multiple enforcement levers and potentially cumulative burdens on defendants. The Bill does not specify coordination mechanisms between different enforcement regimes.

10. Regulation can broaden scope (s 221H(1)(c)). The Bill allows regulations to prescribe additional relevant offences. That delegation means the scope of the Chapter could be broadened administratively in future and stakeholders should watch for subordinate legislation that changes the catalogue of relevant offences.

11. Extraterritorial conduct included (s 221H(2)). Conduct that occurred under Commonwealth or foreign law can be treated as a relevant offence if it would have been a relevant offence in WA. This expands exposure to material relating to foreign conduct and could create evidentiary complications and cross‑jurisdictional issues.

12. “Good faith” exceptions for official actors (s 221K). The exceptions for law enforcement and intelligence officers and for persons acting in the course of official duties are conditioned on “good faith”. The meaning and proof of “good faith” will be contested in litigation, and the Bill does not specify mechanisms to determine or challenge that state of mind beyond ordinary legal adjudication.

In practice, these “gotchas” create areas of legal uncertainty and points at which early judicial clarification will be sought. Entities and individuals operating in publishing, social media, or content creation who handle material that might depict conduct within the statutory catalogue will face factual and procedural issues in assessing risk and responding to court orders.

The Bill creates both a compliance obligation and a defensive regime. Lawyers, compliance officers, publishers and platforms should frame responses to the Bill’s provisions around the operative sections: the offence elements in s 221I, the defences in s 221J, the rectification order powers in s 221L and the exceptions in s 221K. The following are concrete steps and recordkeeping practices grounded in the text.

1. Screening and categorisation of material

• Map the scope of “relevant offences” against your content inventory. Section 221H lists the Criminal Code chapters and specified Road Traffic Act provisions that define “relevant offence”. Identify content that depicts conduct that could be said to fall within those listed chapters or Road Traffic Act sections. Because regulations may add further relevant offences (s 221H(1)(c)), maintain an ongoing regulatory watch.

• Treat material dissemination broadly. The definition of “disseminate” includes electronic publication and social media (s 221G). Any content that is posted, uploaded, transmitted, made available for access, or otherwise communicated should be included in screening procedures.

2. Implement pre‑publication checks and takedown triage

• Create a triage protocol for potentially problematic material that flags: depiction of conduct arguably constituting a relevant offence; material that could humiliate, intimidate or victimise an identified victim; material that might be read as boasting, glorifying or encouraging conduct (s 221I(3)); or material likely to be offensive or demeaning (s 221I(2)(c)(ii)).

• For flagged material, assess applicability of defences (s 221J(1)). Document whether dissemination is for scientific, educational, academic, artistic, literary, satirical or entertainment purposes (s 221J(1)(a)); whether the dissemination is to warn, complain about or denounce the conduct (s 221J(1)(d)); or whether it is reasonably necessary for legal proceedings, reporting to law enforcement or making an insurance claim (s 221J(1)(e)).

3. Document purpose and necessity

• Maintain contemporaneous records establishing the purpose for dissemination. Because part of the statutory test turns on whether dissemination was likely for purposes in s 221I(3) and because defences such as “reasonably necessary” and “public interest” exist (s 221J(1)(e)-(f)), a content owner or publisher should document why the material was published, the editorial decision process, approvals, and any professional standards relied upon. This evidence will be material if the defendant seeks to prove a statutory defence.

4. Journalist and news publisher status

• For persons and entities claiming the journalist/news publisher defence in s 221J(1)(b), collect evidence that fits the statutory factors in ss 221J(2)-(3): records of regular engagement gathering and assessing information on matters of public interest; editorial briefs and workflows; compliance with recognised professional standards or codes of practice; and evidence of public reach and publishing activity. The court may consider these factors in determining status.

5. Responding to rectification orders

• Understand the court’s rectification power (s 221L(2)). If a court makes an order, the person must take reasonable steps to remove, retract, recover, delete, destroy or forfeit the material within the period specified. Courts can make such orders on their own initiative or on oral application by the prosecutor (s 221L(3)). Because orders can be made pre‑conviction (s 221L(4)), have operational plans ready for rapid takedown and content recovery.

• Comply promptly or be prepared to justify non‑compliance. Non‑compliance without reasonable excuse is an offence carrying significant penalties including imprisonment, a fine of $12,000 and a daily fine of $200 (s 221L(7)). Ensure escalation procedures are in place to address court orders within any specified period and maintain legal arguments demonstrating reasonable excuse where compliance is impossible or unlawful.

6. Legal process and engagement

• Engage counsel early if charged or if a rectification application is made. Prosecutors may make oral applications for rectification (s 221L(3)(b)), and courts may act on their own initiative (s 221L(3)(a)), creating a need for rapid legal response.

• Preserve evidence relevant to defences. Evidence that dissemination was for a genuine public interest purpose, or that it was reasonably necessary for legal proceedings or law enforcement reporting, will be crucial. Maintain backups, editorial logs, chain of custody records and internal communications to show purpose and decision making.

7. Platform and intermediary policies

• Prepare takedown workflows and notices. Because dissemination includes making material available for access (s 221G(1)(b)), platforms should maintain processes to take down material promptly when ordered by a court, and to record actions taken and the bases for any refusal.

• Review terms of service and DMCA‑style processes against the Bill’s processes. The Bill creates court orders that override ordinary content