From the ALRC President
Welcome to the latest edition of the ALRC’s In Brief newsletter. It has been a busy few months at the Commission, with all three of our Inquiries releasing publications, and a major media event for our most recently completed Inquiry.
The Review of the Future Acts Regime has delivered its Discussion Paper, the second publication for the Inquiry. The Discussion Paper outlines options for reform and asks for further feedback from native title holders and stakeholders on how the future Acts regime can be reformed, and invites submissions in response to the Discussion Paper.
Our Review of Human Tissue Laws and Review of Surrogacy Laws have both also released their Issues Papers in recent weeks, calling for submissions and asking stakeholders and the public to comment on the issues that we are likely to look at in these Inquiries, as well as outlining the approaches and principles we are considering in conducting these reviews. You can read further updates from all three teams below.
I was also pleased to visit Canberra last week to deliver a National Press Club address, ‘Safe, informed, supported: addressing sexual violence’ following the publication earlier this year of the Final Report for our Justice Responses to Sexual Violence Inquiry. Alongside Domestic, Family and Sexual violence Commissioner Micaela Cronin, we addressed the gathered media, stakeholders, and the audience watching the broadcast event, highlighting our Final Report’s important recommendations for reform in this area.
Commissioner Cronin and I took the opportunity to talk about the profound impact that sexual violence has on our communities and on individuals who experience sexual violence, and the imperative for substantial and sustainable reform across the justice system and beyond. You can watch the recording of the National Press Club address on the ALRC website.
We continue to plan the Australasian Law Reform Agencies Conference (ALRAC 2025) and our 50th Anniversary Celebration dinner in October this year. Further information will be coming in the next few weeks, including registration and ticketing for both events. If you wish to get in touch about these events, in particular for those who may wish to organise a table for our 50th anniversary celebration dinner, please email events@alrc.gov.au. I do hope we will see you there.
– Mordy Bromberg
The Hon Justice Mordecai Bromberg
President, Australian Law Reform Commission
Tell us what you think: submissions now open until 10 July
The Discussion Paper for the Review of the Future Acts Regime is out now. The Discussion Paper outlines options for reform to the future acts regime in the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), and continues the conversation started earlier in our Inquiry by asking for your thoughts on potential reforms. Submissions in response to the Discussion Paper are now open, and will close on 11 July.
Join us at our free webinar, 1–2pm AEST on Wednesday, 2 July
On Wednesday 2 July, we will be hosting a free webinar to outline what we’ve heard so far, discuss some of our key ideas for reform, and answer your questions. You can learn more and register via the link before.
A message from Commissioner, Tony McAvoy SC
Our Commissioner, Tony McAvoy SC, has recorded a short video about the Inquiry and seeking your feedback to help us develop recommendations for reform.
Issues Papers released for the Review of Human Tissue Laws and the Review of Surrogacy Laws
Issues Papers have recently been released for both our Review of Human Tissue Laws and Review of Surrogacy Laws. Read more on these publications below.
The Issues Paper for the Review of Human Tissue Laws outlines key issues the Inquiry is considering, proposes principles to guide law reform in this area, and sets out questions for stakeholders to consider. Key issues include donation by living and deceased persons, anatomical and post-mortem examinations, advertising and trade in human tissue, and allocation of donated human tissue. Submissions in response to the Human Tissue Laws Issues Paper are open until 4 July.
The Issues Paper for the Review of Surrogacy Laws outlines topics of focus for the Inquiry, including barriers to domestic surrogacy, legal parentage of children born through surrogacy, oversight and harmonisation. The Issues Paper also seeks feedback on principles to guide the Inquiry, such as accessibility, pragmatism, harm minimisation, harmonisation and human rights. Submissions in response to the Surrogacy Laws Issues Paper are open until 11 July 2025.
Watch now: National Press Club address, ‘Safe, Informed, Supported’
Justice Mordy Bromberg addresses the National Press Club of Australia in Canberra on 4 June 2025
On June 4th, ALRC President the Hon Justice Mordy Bromberg joined Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Commissioner Micaela Cronin to deliver a National Press Club address titled ‘Safe, informed, supported: addressing sexual violence’. Justice Bromberg and Commissioner Cronin addressed the ALRC’s 2025 Final Report in its Inquiry into Justice Responses to Sexual Violence, highlighted the seriousness and prevalence of sexual violence in Australia, and outlined the roadmap to tackle the challenges.
You can now watch the National Press Club’s recording of the joint address online via ABC iView (address and media questions) or the NPC channel on Youtube below (address only).
Upcoming events
Registrations will soon open for the ALRC’s 50th anniversary celebration dinner on October 9th, 2025. Hosted in Melbourne at the elegant RACV City Club’s 17th floor, the evening promises to be an engaging and enjoyable celebration of this iconic Australian legal institution, and an opportunity to network and hear from eminent peers and colleagues across the legal profession.
We will be announcing our program for the evening soon, along with ticket sales (both individual and table tickets), as well as a range of exciting featured guests. To stay updated on our 50th anniversary as well as the ALRAC 2025 event, and to be notified when tickets are released for sale, subscribe for event updates at www.alrc.gov.au/events.
Address to the National Press Club of Australia by ALRC President the Hon Justice Mordy Bromberg, 4 June 2025
<
Transcript
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Can I commence by acknowledging the Ngunnawal and Ngambri peoples as the traditional custodians of the land on which we meet today. I pay my deep respects to their Elders, past and present. I also extend my thanks to the National Press Club for giving Micaela and I the opportunity to shine a spotlight on a social problem which is clearly out of control.
Not only out of control because sexual violence is experienced in Australia in endemic proportions, but out of control in the sense that no strategy has yet effectively addressed the problem. There are many levers government can pull to help address sexual violence, such as improved education, improved social services, and improving the way the justice system deals with sexual violence. Commendably, Government has begun to address that third lever. Improving the Justice System’s response to sexual violence was the focus of a recently completed 12-month Australian Law Reform Commission inquiry.
One of the principal findings of our Inquiry, and the fundamental point that I want to make today, is that the problem of sexual violence will not be addressed unless the justice system is given a better opportunity to deal with it, in circumstances where currently, it is largely not dealing with it. Why – because, typically, sexual violence occurs in Australia without leaving a trace on the justice system. Most perpetrators are not held to account, and the vast majority of people who have experienced sexual violence are not given the opportunity of a just outcome.
Nine out of ten women who disclosed to a recent ABS survey that they had been subjected to sexual violence did not report to police. But even when victims do report, their engagement with the justice system is typically short-lived. In New South Wales, Victoria, and right here in the ACT (and likely across all States and Territories), in the order of 75-85% of reports to police do not proceed to a charge.
That all suggests that only about 2% of women who say they have been subjected to sexual violence are able to overcome the barriers to access to justice. It also suggests that, at best, only about 2% of those alleged to have perpetrated sexual offending are held accountable before the law.
That is why the Australian Law Reform Commission says that most people who experience sexual violence in Australia shoulder that harm without an opportunity for a just outcome; and why we say that most people who perpetrate sexual violence face no consequences for their wrongdoing. This means that in our society, sexual violence is typically invisible – it is not recorded, recognized, or renounced. Community safety is not enhanced.
The justice system – and by that, I mean police, prosecutors, the legal profession and the Courts – will not fix the staggering prevalence of sexual violence on its own. However, the justice system has a critical role to play and the problem of sexual violence cannot be addressed unless the significant failings of the justice system are rectified. Many of the barriers to engagement with the justice system for people who have experienced sexual violence, are barriers for which the justice system bears some responsibility. Those barriers need to be addressed and are the main subject of the ALRC’s report.
We need to better understand that people who have experienced sexual violence need to be assisted to access the justice system and the just outcomes it is capable of providing. We also need to better appreciate that for our community to be safer, society needs the perpetrators of sexual violence to be brought to justice – for their conduct to be exposed, renounced, and addressed, and for a message to be sent to all – that sexual violence will no longer occur in Australia with impunity. Bringing people who have perpetrated sexual violence to account under the law is a fundamental requirement of a society governed by the rule of law.
The Australian Law Reform Commission is government’s trusted, expert and independent research and advisory body on law reform, providing government with frank, fearless, and expert advice for the last 50 years. In our national inquiry into the adequacy of the justice system’s response to sexual violence, the ALRC received hundreds of submissions, and was greatly assisted by the insight of a lived experience Expert Advisory Group. We also extensively consulted with police, prosecutors, defence lawyers, and judges. Front-line service providers were also consulted as well as academic experts. We also heard from many other people with lived experience of sexual violence and the justice system. Those valuable contributions were then supplemented by research and the astute consideration of our talented team of law reformers, led by subject-matter experts the Honourable Marcia Neave and Judge Liesl Kudelka.
Our 12-month inquiry produced a report titled “Safe, Informed, Supported: Reforming Justice Responses to Sexual Violence”, which makes 64 recommendations for either reform or further inquiry.
Of all the conclusions made about the justice system’s response to sexual violence, the ALRC considers under-engagement with the justice system to be the most significant problem. Most of the recommendations made in the Report are directed at addressing the barriers to access and engagement with the justice system that people who have experienced sexual violence face.
The ALRC, does not suggest that the problem of low trust and underuse of the justice system by those who have experienced sexual violence is the fault of those harmed.
Nor, by focusing on that problem, have we ignored the problem that many victims of sexual violence who do engage with the justice system are subjected to more harm than good. To the contrary, the ill-treatment and re-traumatization often experienced by complainants of sexual violence who do engage with the justice system, is itself one of the most significant barriers to engagement. The reason that many people who have experienced sexual violence do not engage with the justice system is their fear of ill treatment by police and prosecutors and during a trial. To address this, the ALRC has made many recommendations, including to:
- improve education and training about trauma for police, prosecutors, lawyers and judges;
- strengthen police and prosecution guidelines to better prevent traumatisation and the high rates of disengagement;
- ensure that prohibitions on inappropriate questioning of complainants during cross-examination are properly applied and enforced;
- challenge and address myths and misconceptions about sexual violence; and
- provide more assistance to complainants so that they can effectively engage with the justice system by giving them access to their own legal advice and to legal representation to protect them from the unwarranted disclosure of their private and confidential information.
If those failings of the justice system can be avoided or diminished, then one of the most significant causes for the under-engagement problem – the perception that if you engage with the justice system you will be re-traumatised – will itself be diminished.
The ALRC’s road map to improving the justice system otherwise addresses the under-engagement problem in three main ways.
First, we tackle the current absence of a safe, informed and supportive place to report sexual violence as a pathway into the justice system. Currently, police reporting is the principal place that people who have experienced sexual violence seek access into the justice system.
We know that people who experience sexual violence can feel scared, ashamed, humiliated or embarrassed. Feeling angry and betrayed, and feeling powerless and unworthy, can stop people who experience sexual violence from talking about what happened to them. We know that the formal disclosure of sexual violence can be a difficult experience. To overcome this significant barrier, the ALRC found that people who have experienced sexual violence need a safe, informed and supported place to disclose.
Research tells us that properly-resourced front-line sexual assault service providers can provide a best practice, trusted and safe place to formally report sexual violence. These services are also well placed to connect people who have experienced sexual violence to the legal advice that they need. Once connected, people who have experienced sexual violence can then make well-informed choices about their rights and entitlements, and to decide whether and how to engage with the justice system. The ALRC proposes, firstly, that this kind of legal assistance and advice be available to every person who has experienced sexual violence irrespective of where they live. And secondly, that the support services of a Justice System Navigator be provided – that is a support person who would walk alongside and guide complainants through the criminal justice system, including by supporting them to report
to police.
Second, we tackle the high attrition rate – the up to 85% disengagement rate for those people who have reported to police. The 2021 inquiry held here in the Australian Capital Territory found that the predominant reason for the low charge rates in the ACT is the failure of police to properly and appropriately investigate sexual offences. The findings of the ACT Review reflect what complainants of sexual violence have been saying for decades – that they feel disempowered, disrespected, and re-traumatised by police responses to their reports and consequently withdraw.
The ALRC considers that greater scrutiny and accountability of police behaviour and decision-making is required. To better understand the systemic reasons sexual violence matters typically drop out of the criminal justice system, we have recommended that each state and territory establish a task force to review all reports of sexual violence made to police within the last 12-18 months. We also recommend establishing an independent review and complaints mechanism, to both facilitate the on-going review of police decision-making, and enable an opportunity for complainants to challenge decisions made by police not to progress to charge.
Thirdly, the ALRC considers that people who have experienced sexual violence will more likely engage with the justice system if we expand their access to civil and to restorative justice pathways and remedies. We recognise that people who have experienced sexual violence have diverse justice needs well beyond a need to see a perpetrator convicted and imprisoned through the criminal justice system.
In the context of 1.7 million Australians experiencing sexual harassment over a recent 12-month period, the ALRC makes recommendations to make civil justice pathways more accessible by:
- extending the prohibition on sexual harassment (which in practical terms is currently mainly confined to workplaces) to all areas of public activity;
- reducing financial barriers and giving expanded access to cheaper and quicker tribunal processes;
- shifting the burden of, and responsibility for, addressing sexual harassment from the individual
harmed to organisations and regulatory bodies; and - expanding the range of orders that can be made when a court or tribunal finds that someone has been sexually harassed.
These proposals build upon the very good work undertaken by the Australian Human Rights Commission’s “Respect At Work” Report.
We also recommend making the restorative justice pathway more accessible — by legislating for restorative justice in sexual violence matters so this pathway is more widely available.
There are many more recommendations I don’t have time to outline, such as the need for better data collection and better evaluation of previous law reform exercises. But it is important to emphasise that all of the ALRC’s recommendations can be implemented without compromising the fundamental rights of an accused person to a fair trial.
Finally, may I conclude by saying that The National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children puts the annual economic cost of gender-based violence, including sexual violence, against women and children at $26 billion. It states that ‘more needs to be done to ensure justice systems are safe, accessible, and easy for victim-survivors to navigate’. Doing more will require more commitment and more resources. However, the investment necessary is well justified. It far outstrips the financial and human cost of sexual violence remaining widespread, under-reported, and, in the words of the National Plan, ‘in the shadows’.
The work of Micaela and the Domestic, Family, and Sexual Violence Commission and the ALRC’s proposed reforms will help to take Australia out of those shadows. We shine a light on both the problem and the solution. My appeal to you – the media here gathered – is that you now amplify that light into the blow torch required to help to finally bring the problem of sexual violence under control.
The Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) today released the Issues Paper for its Review of Surrogacy Laws, and called for submissions to the Inquiry. The Issues Paper provides a broad overview of the Inquiry and sets out 27 questions for stakeholders to consider.
ALRC Assistant Commissioner Associate Professor Ronli Sifris, commented on the Issue Paper’s release:
“I am pleased to have published our Issues Paper for the Review of Surrogacy Laws. This is a valuable opportunity to hear from people with personal experience of surrogacy and stakeholders about the direction of the Inquiry. Importantly, the Issues Paper also suggests the principles and approach that should guide our work in this Inquiry. I encourage anyone with an interest, expertise, or experience in surrogacy to read the Issues Paper and make a submission.”
ALRC President the Hon Justice Mordy Bromberg added:
“Surrogacy is an important area for law reform given the lack of consistent laws across Australian states and territories, and because of the growing number of children born via surrogacy, which is increasingly being accessed overseas. Public feedback on the Issues Paper, particularly from those who have experience of surrogacy, is vital to informing our reform thinking.”
The Issues Paper outlines the ALRC’s proposed principles to guide the Inquiry, including: respect and dignity, accessibility, pragmatism, harm minimisation, harmonisation and human rights, with a particular focus on the rights of the child. The Issues Paper asks stakeholders to provide feedback on these principles, as well as issues and topics including:
- Barriers to domestic surrogacy
- Legal parentage of children born through surrogacy
- Citizenship, passports and visas for children born through surrogacy overseas
- Oversight and harmonisation
Submissions are now open in response to the Issues Paper, and the ALRC is inviting individuals and organisations to provide submissions until 11 July 2025.
The ALRC has undertaken thorough initial work and consultations in preparation of this Issues Paper, including considering what is working in overseas jurisdictions and the formation and meeting of an expert Advisory Committee.
The ALRC will publish a Discussion Paper in late 2025, which will invite submissions on options for reform.
Background
The Commonwealth Attorney-General referred the Review of Surrogacy Laws to the ALRC on 6 December 2024.
The Review’s Terms of Reference ask the ALRC to review surrogacy laws, policies and practices, to identify reforms, particularly proposals for uniform or complementary state, territory and Commonwealth laws that are consistent with Australia’s obligations, and protect and promote human rights. The ALRC is also asked to consult widely with relevant stakeholders and the Australian public.
The Inquiry is being led by ALRC President, the Hon Justice Mordecai Bromberg, together with Assistant Commissioner Associate Professor Ronli Sifris and the ALRC Inquiry team. The ALRC is to provide its final report to the Attorney-General by 29 July 2026.
Learn more about the review at https://www.alrc.gov.au/inquiry/review-of-surrogacy-laws/
Links
Review of Surrogacy Laws Issues Paper (2025)
Terms of Reference of the Review of Surrogacy Laws
The Hon Justice Mordy Bromberg, President of the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC), and Commissioner Micaela Cronin of the Domestic, Family, and Sexual Violence Commission (DFSVC), will address the National Press Club in Canberra tomorrow, speaking on the challenge of addressing sexual violence in Australia.
The joint address, entitled ‘Safe, informed and supported: addressing sexual violence’, follows the ALRC’s 12 month Inquiry into Justice Responses to Sexual Violence and the tabling of the Final Report on 6 March this year.
Justice Bromberg will outline the ALRC’s findings and recommendations, highlighting how the justice system has failed in achieving its twin goals of accountability and access to justice, while Commissioner Cronin will speak to the importance of addressing the needs of the community, and what action should be taken to advance and achieve the goals of the National Plan to End Violence Against Women and Children.
Commenting ahead of the National Press Club Address, Justice Bromberg said:
“This address is an important opportunity to deepen the national conversation on addressing sexual violence. The work of the ALRC and the DFSVC highlights the scale of the challenge, and the matching need for significant reform right across the justice system and beyond. Sexual violence is a unique and widespread harm. The justice system has a critical role to play in ending this harm by providing people who have experienced sexual violence with a safe, informed, and supported way of accessing justice; and by holding perpetrators of sexual violence to account.”
Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Commissioner, Micaela Cronin, said:
“The ALRC has made a powerful statement, recognising that sexual violence causes widespread harm, particularly for women, that often has lifelong impacts. We must also recognise that rates of sexual violence are getting worse, and our response is not improving fast enough – it is one of the most harmful, under reported, and under prosecuted crimes.
“National Cabinet has identified domestic, family and sexual violence as one of its top priorities, and the national Women’s and Women’s Safety Ministerial Council is leading governments’ collective efforts. Our shared goal under the National Plan is, and should be, to end domestic, family and sexual violence in one generation. This report helps us on that path, now we must act.”
Background
The Final Report of the Australian Law Reform Commission’s (ALRC) Inquiry into Justice Reponses to Sexual Violence, Safe, Informed, Supported: Reforming Justice Responses to Sexual Violence, was tabled on 6 March 2025 and contained 64 recommendations.
The ALRC’s 64 recommendations would improve the justice system’s response to sexual violence by:
- Addressing barriers for people who have experienced sexual violence to access and engage with the justice system;
- Strengthening the justice system’s accountability and processes, including by avoiding retraumatisation and countering myths and misconceptions about sexual violence; and
- Expanding justice pathways and the remedies available, including through civil and restorative justice pathways.
During the Inquiry, the ALRC received 220 submissions from individuals and organisations, and undertook 126 consultations, involving more than 384 consultees. The Inquiry was led by Justice Bromberg together with subject matter experts and Commissioners for the Inquiry, the Hon Marcia Neave and Judge Liesl Kudelka. The Inquiry was also supported by an Australian Government appointed Expert Advisory Group comprised of people with lived experience of sexual violence and advocates, who provided critical input and guidance to the Inquiry.
Links
- Safe, Informed, Supported: Reforming Justice Responses to Sexual Violence (Final Report/Summary Report)
ENDS
For more information or to request interviews contact:
Jez Hunghanfoo
Director of Communications and Engagement
Australian Law Reform Commission
P: 03 9959 5313
E: comms@alrc.gov.au
W: www.alrc.gov.au
The Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) today released its Issues Paper in its Review of Human Tissue Laws, calling for submissions to the Inquiry. The Issues Paper provides a broad overview of the Inquiry and sets out eight questions for stakeholders to consider.
ALRC Commissioner Dr Maeghan Toews, commented on the Issue Paper’s release:
“The Issues Paper is an important guide to the early direction of the Inquiry, and is a key opportunity for stakeholders to inform and engage with the ALRC’s work. I encourage all those with an interest in the Inquiry to make a submission, particularly those with experience of donation and use of human tissue.”
ALRC President the Hon Justice Mordy Bromberg added:
“This Inquiry is looking at a complex area of law with implications for medical treatment, research, education and anyone in the community who may rely on or contribute to the donation and transplantation of tissue. It is imperative that our laws in this area reflect current and emerging technologies and practice, as well as community expectations. The ALRC last reviewed Human Tissue laws in 1977, and I look forward to hearing from all people with an interest in the Inquiry.”
The Issues Paper asks stakeholders to consider and provide feedback on issues including:
- The principles that should guide law reform in this area
- Donation of tissue by living persons and after death
- Anatomical and post-mortem examinations
- Advertising and trade in human tissue
- Allocation of donated human tissue
Submissions are now open in response to the Issues Paper, and the ALRC is inviting individuals and organisations to provide submissions until 4 July 2025.
The ALRC has undertaken extensive initial work and consultations in preparation of this Issues Paper, including the formation and meeting of an expert Advisory Committee.
The ALRC will publish a Discussion Paper in late 2025, which will invite submissions on detailed options for reform.
Background
The Commonwealth Attorney-General referred the Review of Human Tissue Laws to the ALRC on 6 February 2025.
The Review’s Terms of Reference ask the ALRC to consider what reforms are necessary to harmonise and modernise human tissue laws. As part of this, the ALRC has been asked to explore matters including tissue donation, retrieval and transplantation; consent arrangements; the operation of ‘schools of anatomy’; and disclosure of information provisions. The ALRC has also been asked to consider: equity and ethical approaches to improving access to cell, tissue and organ transplantation; contemporary and emerging technologies and practices; and international experience and approaches.
The Inquiry is being led by Commissioner Dr Maeghan Toews, alongside the ALRC President, the Hon Justice Mordecai Bromberg. The ALRC is to provide its final report to the Government by 16 August 2026.
Learn more about the review at https://www.alrc.gov.au/inquiry/review-of-human-tissue-laws/
Links
Review of Human Tissue Laws Issues Paper (2025)
Terms of Reference of the Review of Human Tissue Laws
ENDS
For more information contact:
Jez Hunghanfoo
Director of Communications and Engagement
P: 03 9959 5313
E: comms@alrc.gov.au
W: www.alrc.gov.au
The Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) today released its Discussion Paper in its review of the future acts regime in the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).
The Discussion Paper sets out a number of questions and proposed reforms for feedback. Organisations and individuals with an interest in the Inquiry are invited to provide submissions until 10 July 2025.
ALRC Commissioner Tony McAvoy SC commented regarding the Discussion Paper’s release:
“The Discussion Paper is informed by our research and consultations and is an important milestone for the Inquiry. It contains options for reform aimed at making the future acts regime more efficient, easier to use, better resourced, and fairer for all parties. This is an important opportunity for native title holders and other stakeholders to tell us what they think as we prepare recommendations for our Final Report in December.”
ALRC President the Hon Justice Mordy Bromberg added:
“The ideas in this Discussion Paper seek to significantly improve the current future acts regime. They do this by facilitating lower-impact activities where appropriate; protecting rights in high impact situations; and ensuring a fair and straightforward agreement-making process. ALRC Inquiries are underpinned by extensive research, stakeholder consultations and engagement with experts, and we want to hear from as many people as possible. I encourage all those with an interest to make a submission.”
The future acts regime is the legal framework that sets out the processes and requirements that apply when native title rights and interests are affected by certain actions, such as the grant of a mining lease or building of public infrastructure.
To date, the ALRC has conducted more than 60 consultations with more than 200 consultees, received more than 40 submissions in response to the Issues Paper, and attended events around the country to discuss the Inquiry. The ALRC has held two expert Advisory Committee meetings and will continue to consult extensively, before publishing a Final Report, due to the Attorney-General on 8 December 2025.
Background
The Commonwealth Attorney-General referred the Review of the Future Acts Regime to the ALRC on 4 June 2024.
The Inquiry’s Terms of Reference request the ALRC to consider the Native Title Act’s intent and the current operation of the future acts regime. The ALRC has been asked to recommend reforms that provide for Australia’s current and future social and economic development in a way that protects the rights and interests of native title holders, as well as allowing communities, industry, business and government to navigate the regime effectively, fairly and efficiently.
The future acts review is being led by Commissioner Tony McAvoy SC, a Wirdi man, accomplished barrister and native title expert, alongside the ALRC President, the Hon Justice Mordy Bromberg. The ALRC is to provide its final report to the Government by 8 December 2025.
Learn more about the review at www.alrc.gov.au/inquiry/review-of-the-future-acts-regime.
Links
Review of the Future Acts Regime Discussion Paper (2025)
Review of the Future Acts Regime Issues Paper (2024)
Submissions to the Review of the Future Acts Regime
Terms of Reference for the Review of the Future Acts Regime
ENDS
For more information contact:
Jez Hunghanfoo
Director of Communications and Engagement
P: 03 9959 5313
E: comms@alrc.gov.au
W: www.alrc.gov.au
Speech by ALRC President, the Hon Justice Mordy Bromberg to the Commonwealth Law Conference, Malta 2025
Wednesday, 9 April 2025
ALRC President the Hon Justice Mordy Bromberg
The Australian Law Reform Commission is the Australian government’s independent research and advisory agency on law reform. We conduct inquiries, provide reports and make recommendations for the reform of Australian laws. Our legislative charter is to review those laws referred to us by the Attorney-General, in order to systematically develop and reform the law, particularly by:
- modernising the law;
- removing defects and simplifying the law;
- adopting new or more effective methods for administering the
law; and - providing access to justice.
Over its 50 year history, the ALRC has conducted some 80 inquiries and delivered thousands of evidence-based recommendations for the improvement of Australian law and practice. The ALRC has established a well-earned reputation for excellence. Our inquiries are co-led by renowned subject-matter experts and skilled law reformers. Our staff are skilled in policy development and legislative design. Our recommendations are based on comprehensive consultations and research.
Over 85% of ALRC reports have either been substantially or partially implemented. Beyond the direct influence our recommendations have had on legislation, the ripple effect of the ALRC’s work can be extensively observed in academic and judicial consideration of the law and its need for reform.
I will say more about the work of the ALRC later. First I want to set the scene to make the proposition that I hope you will all accept. My proposition is that independent law reform agencies have an important contribution to make in helping to ensure that our laws are fit for the future. There are converts in the room I know, so my pitch is really directed to the others – perhaps those from nations who have not had the benefit of ‘institutional law reform’. That is – law reform provided by a permanent institution which is expert at law reform and which, importantly, is independent of government.
Let me begin by spelling out some fairly obvious propositions that I am sure we can all agree with.
We can all agree that good law is a critical component of every well-functioning society. Law is about regulating the behaviour of persons in a sea of competing interests and values. Law provides the infrastructure for our social and our economic interactions. It governs our existence as a society. The importance of the law to our individual wellbeing, both social and economic, and to our coherence as a society cannot be overstated.
We can also all agree that law is more likely to be good law if it is well crafted and well maintained. Modern laws that are fit for the future will be laws that are well considered. They will be laws which are based on evidence rather than mere intuition. They will be laws which are founded upon policy which is inclusive. That is, laws which are formulated with extensive input from the very persons whose behaviour the law seeks to regulate in order to get their insights on the problems that the law reform exercise must address as well as to assist in finding the solutions.
As proponents of the Rule of Law, we can also agree that for a good law to be effective it needs to be accessible. Accessible in two respects. First, the law should be simple, clear and coherent and thus able to be understood and navigated by those whom it effects. In other words, the law must be well designed. Not only well drafted using clear and concise language but, importantly, the law must be based on an underlying structure which allows every part of the legislation to cohere and operate consistently with the next. Secondly, there must be access to justice. That is, equal access to the redress or the relief that the law intends to provide.
We are also likely to agree that there are laws on our statute books that are not good laws in the sense here being discussed. Australia’s statute book is, unfortunately, replete with examples of legislative disrepair, including important statutes which provide the legal infrastructure for many of our vital industries or provide the legal framework through which critical social services are distributed. There are numerous statutes which fail to meet a basic requirement of the Rule of Law – that our laws are clear and accessible.
Australia’s statute book is also replete with examples of laws that fail to satisfy or at least fully satisfy the laws’ policy objectives. Sometimes that is caused by the faulty design of the original architect. Commonly, knee-jerk legislative amendments designed to fix potholed problems lead to inconsistencies and policy incoherence. Sometimes, the behavioural change sought to be achieved by the law is cleverly avoided. Most often, laws in need of a policy make-over simply need to be modernized so that they better align with changed circumstances brought about by the
development of new technologies or the evolution of social norms.
Lastly, a further aspect of the consensus I am sure we all share, is that bad laws – that is laws that fail to meet their policy objectives or are inaccessible because of bad design or because the relief they promise is not sufficiently accessible to all – have both a human and an economic cost.
The economic costs are undoubtedly large. Overly prescriptive and structurally incoherent lawsresult in excessive compliance costs and in unnecessary but costly disputation. More expensive than that will be the fact that ineffective laws will fail to solve the social or commercial problems they were intended to resolve.
Of course, the social cost of bad legal design and a lack of legislative maintenance is also manifested in the failure to provide access to justice and to just outcomes. There is a heavy human cost and a heavy economic cost for a society that fails to optimise justice.
Poorly designed, poorly maintained and inaccessible laws are, I think, largely a product of the failure of government to appreciate the real value of good law. A failure to properly recognise law as vital infrastructure.
Governments seem to recognise the importance of building and maintaining the physical infrastructure necessary to sustain and nurture our economic well-being. New freeways are built, and our roads are systematically maintained so that the infrastructure necessary to sustain and improve our economic wealth is and remains best practice. In that respect, we see the value of spending money upfront to properly design our infrastructure, to build it with the best available components, and to service our investment with systematic and regular maintenance. It is, as
we recognise, money well spent because the benefits of good infrastructure far outweigh its cost.
When it comes to legal infrastructure, governments often fail to appreciate the benefits of well-designed laws and the enormous economic and social cost of poor legislative design and a lack of
systematic maintenance.
If we want our laws to purr then we need to make well-designed laws with evidence-based components. Those laws will need to be maintained. A service sticker, like that found on every car windscreen, should be stamped on every enactment. We need to recognise that laws based on little more than the intuition of the politicians who made them will not take us to where justice needs to be.
Law reform has an obvious role in making our laws purr. And the proposition I would like us all to accept is that institutional law reform can make an immensely valuable contribution to ensuring that our laws are and remain fit for the future.
Institutional law reform seems to be more prevalent in the Commonwealth family of nations than it is in the rest of the world. An explosion of institutional law reform amongst many nations of the
Commonwealth occurred in the 1960s and 1970s, with the establishment of law reform agencies in England and Wales, in Scotland and in most of the states and territories of Australia, as well as at the national level with the formation of the Australian Law Reform Commission in 1975.
Of course, beyond institutional law reform there are, and for many centuries have been, other kinds of law reform. Law reform has long been undertaken by judge-made common law. However, with the advent of representative government, the judiciary has generally retreated from significant innovation in deference to the theory that lawmaking is mostly for the elected. The elected engage in law reform processes most often within government departments and through parliamentary committees. Ad hoc Royal Commissions have also been significant sources of law reform. The field is somewhat crowded.
I do not wish to contend that law reform should always be done by law reform agencies like the ALRC. But I do contend that institutional law reform is a necessary cog in the wheel. It deserves to be recognised as an essential component of a representative democracy which provides fair, accessible and relevant laws of the kind that all of its citizens are entitled to enjoy.
There is little doubt in my mind that institutional law reform is best capable of delivering reform of the highest quality. Compared to other sources of law reform, well-resourced institutional law reform usually has one or more of the following advantages:
i. its work is considered and thorough and tends not to be hurried by political imperatives, as is often the case when law reform is done within government departments or by parliamentary committees;
ii. its actors are not ad hoc. Recognising that law reform is a discipline requiring unique skill and experience, institutional law reform is able to provide career reformers working closely with
subject-matter experts;
iii. it utilises evidence gathering techniques which tend to be superior in both the scope and the quality of the evidence collected, including because consultation with stakeholders will usually be
more thorough and evidence gathering will take into account both local and international experience;
iv. law reform institutions, like the ALRC, have exceptional access to the very best specialists – judges, scholars and leading practitioners both nationally and internationally – who provide
subject-matter expertise that significantly contributes to ideas for reform and ensures the quality-control necessary for effective reform;
v. lastly and importantly, law reform institutions like the ALRC function independently of government. The advice we give is frank and fearless. It is the best advice available and not simply what the government may want to hear. When law reform is done in-house, it will often be controlled by the political imperatives of government and will sometimes be more based in intuition than
evidence.
Furthermore, lawyers are not usually trained to think outside the box and generally do not. Law reformers must. Law reform should not be confined to tinkering within the comfort zone well known to and enjoyed by the specialist legal profession in the legal field being reformed. Law reformers should come into the field with fresh eyes and throw up for consideration fresh approaches for resolving what seem to be intractable legal problems. This is a critical contribution that institutional law reformers bring to the process of law reform and is particularly important to the reform of policy.
I return then to the work of the Australian Law Reform Commission to give some examples of the contribution to good laws that institutional law reform can make.
The ALRC has assisted the reform of Australian law across a diverse range of subjects including:
- human tissue laws (1977 and 2025);
- domestic or family violence (1986 and 2010);
- family law (1987 and 2017);
- occupiers liability (1998);
- class actions (1988 and 2017);
- multiculturalism (1992);
- discrimination (1994, 2014 and 2022);
- freedom of information (1996);
- genetics and gene patenting (2003 and 2004);
- privacy law (1983, 2006 and 2013);
- sedition (2006);
- native title (2013 and 2025);
- copyright & the digital economy (2012);
- elder abuse (2016);
- corporate criminal responsibility (2019);
- financial services (2020); and
- sexual violence (2024).
The codification of the common law rules of evidence into a national uniform evidence law is a celebrated example of the ALRC’s achievements in technical or doctrinal law reform. In relation to social policy reform, the ALRC’s report on the Recognition of Aboriginal Customary Laws is often credited for laying the foundations for the recognition of native title by Australia’s common law.
[Justice Bromberg closed with unprepared remarks noting the breadth and complexity of ALRC inquiry matters over the last several years]
END
13 May 2025
The Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) congratulates the Hon Michelle Rowland MP on her appointment today as Commonwealth Attorney-General.
ALRC President the Hon Justice Mordy Bromberg acknowledged the new Attorney-General:
“The Commission congratulates Ms Rowland on her appointment to the role of Commonwealth Attorney-General, Australia’s first law officer. The ALRC offers valuable expertise and recommendations to government on reforming Australian law through its inquiries and reports, and I look forward to working with the Attorney-General and her department to modernise and improve the law.”
Justice Bromberg also thanked former Attorney-General the Hon Mark Dreyfus KC MP, saying:
“I want to thank former Attorney-General the Hon Mark Dreyfus KC MP for his contribution to the law over decades. His substantial legacy as Attorney-General should be recognised and celebrated, including his contribution to revitalising the ALRC.”
The ALRC is Australia’s independent law reform agency, conducting law reform inquiries referred by the Attorney-General. Throughout 2025 the ALRC celebrates its 50th anniversary, while undertaking one of its largest programs of work, comprising the current reviews of the future acts regime in native title law, surrogacy laws, and human tissue laws.
ENDS
For more information contact:
Jez Hunghanfoo
Director of Communications and Engagement
P: 03 9959 5313
E: comms@alrc.gov.au
W: www.alrc.gov.au