Functions of the Regulator
14.52 The Regulator’s functions should be based upon functions that are currently performed by the AGD in administering the classification scheme for publications, films and computer games; and the ACMA, in relation to online and mobile content and broadcast television.14.53 In addition, while the Classification Board would be retained, some of its present functions, in …
Publications
Read moreProhibitions online
12.39 This section outlines the existing methods employed to address RC content online. The Classification of Media Content Act should provide for similar methods of stopping the distribution of Prohibited content.12.40 The ACMA is required to investigate complaints made about online content defined as ‘prohibited content’ under the Broadcasting Services Act. As has been explained, …
Publications
Read moreClassifying before enforcement
12.21 The ALRC recommends that the Classification of Media Content Act should provide that content must be classified Prohibited by the Classification Board before a person is:(a) charged with an offence under the Act that relates to Prohibited content; and(b) issued a notice requiring the person to stop distributing the Prohibited content, for example by …
Publications
Read moreBackground
This is the first comprehensive review of censorship and classification since the ALRC report, Censorship Procedure, published in 1991 (ALRC Report 55). That report recommended a legislative framework that would enable the Commonwealth, states and territories to take a national approach to classification. Its recommendations formed the basis of the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer …
Publications
Read moreReport outline
1.45 This chapter provides an outline of the background to the Inquiry and an analysis of the scope of the Inquiry as defined by the Terms of Reference. It also describes the development of the evidence base to support the law reform response as reflected in the recommendations of this Report.1.46 Chapter 2 describes the …
Publications
Read moreRecommendations
Download Recommendations as a PDF.3. Common Interpretative FrameworkRecommendation 3—1 The Australian Government should amend the following legislation to include a consistent definition of family violence:Social Security Act 1991 (Cth);Social Security (Administration Act) 1999 (Cth);Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth);Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (Cth);A New Tax System (Family Assistance) Act 1999 (Cth);A New …
Publications
Read moreImproving legal frameworks
A continuing projectThe Report contains 102 recommendations for reform of Commonwealth laws that affect people experiencing family violence. The Report builds upon the work undertaken by the ALRC and the New South Wales Law Reform Commission leading to the report, Family Violence—A National Legal Response, ALRC Report 114 (2010). Both inquiries emanate from the work …
Publications
Read moreSummary of recommendations
Part A—Common ThreadsCommon interpretative frameworkAs a foundational aspect of establishing a common interpretative framework, in Chapter 3 the ALRC recommends including in the Commonwealth laws under review the same core definition of family violence. The ALRC considers that systemic benefits would flow from the adoption of a common interpretative framework across the specified legislative areas, …
Publications
Read moreTerms of Reference
Impact of Commonwealth laws on those experiencing family violenceThe 2010 inquiry into family violence by the Australian Law Reform Commission and New South Wales Law Reform Commission (the Commissions) identified issues beyond its scope relating to the impact of Commonwealth laws (other than the Family Law Act 1975) on those experiencing family/domestic violence. In addition, …
Publications
Read moreNon-judicially determined claims of family violence
International comparisons21.33 A number of overseas jurisdictions—including the US, Canada, UK and New Zealand—have family violence provisions. Although these models reflect differing policy considerations in their respective countries, their approaches to evidentiary requirements provide a useful point of comparison with the Australian system.United States 21.34 The US has a comprehensive legislative scheme for the protection …
Publications
Read more