(NT) Abolish Use of Sexual Reputation Evidence in Sexual Offence Cases

Author:  Leah McFetridge | Publish date: 28/07/2025

Problem Identification: 

In the NT, courts may approve the use of evidence describing a victim's ‘sexual reputation’ in a sexual offence case.

Section 4(1) of the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act 1983 (NT) establishes that the court may approve evidence regarding the complainant's ‘general reputation as to chastity’ or ‘sexual activities with any other person’. 

Women’s Legal Service Australia (WLSA) has stated that this evidence has ‘been used to undermine the credibility and reliability of complainants and reinforce rape myths’. Further, the use of sexual reputation evidence has been known to contribute to negative justice outcomes for victims, re-traumatisation of victims and the proliferation of outdated stereotypes.

Context: 

The Australian Law Reform Commission defines sexual reputation evidence as evidence ‘which consists of a witness’ opinion of the complainant (reputation)’, or which is used to support reasoning about the ‘type of person’ the complainant is. 

The Standing Committee of Attorneys-General (SCAG) explained that this evidence was originally allowed based on assumptions that consent on other occasions was relevant to the incident on trial and that 'a woman who was immoral with regard to sexual conduct may also be...untruthful in the witness box.'  

WLSA has argued that allowing the use of sexual reputation evidence proliferates the myth that consent on previous occasions, or having a certain type of reputation, means a person is more likely to have consented to the incident on trial. ALRC has labelled this type of evidence ‘highly prejudicial’. One survivor told Full Stop Australia that the current justice system is ‘based on outdated values and beliefs’. 

Professor Julia O’Connor has said this type of evidence relies on broader ‘rape myths’ which ‘blame the victim rather than the perpetrator of a rape’. This includes myths that ‘women who dress a certain way, drink alcohol, or are perceived as “promiscuous” are somehow asking to be raped’. These myths have been proven to influence jurors, with higher acceptance of rape myths leading to higher rates of acquittal of the defendant. 

As researcher Jessica Schaffer has stated, the use of sexual reputation evidence invites jurors to use evidence of a woman’s…sexual reputation as tantamount to ongoing consent, which ‘contributes to the expectation that victims must act in ‘sexually moral’ ways to be believed.’ 

Full Stop Australia, in consultation with survivors, have argued that questions about sexual reputation are retraumatising for survivors. They have said that such questions aim to undermine a complainant's credibility through ‘outmoded sexist prejudices’, which can be retraumatising. One victim described her experience: ‘The court process was awful … The barrister for the man who raped me alleged that my … past sexual history … indicated that I was not raped.’

Furthermore, the ALRC and SCAG have stated that this evidence is ‘too far removed from the evidence of actual events or circumstances for its admission to be justified in any circumstances’. Therefore, both the ALRC and SCAG have argued that there are no circumstances in which sexual reputation evidence should be allowed in court.

The ALRC, WLSA and Full Stop have called for sexual reputation evidence to be inadmissible in all circumstances. They have said this could help ensure that only evidence relevant to the case is used to determine facts and could help to reduce the retraumatisation and distress of victims. 

There is significant domestic precedent for banning the use of sexual reputation evidence under any circumstances. All other states and territories (QLD, VIC, WA, NSW, ACT, TAS and SA) have made sexual reputation evidence inadmissible under all circumstances.  

Solution Identification: 

Amend section 4(1) of the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act 1983 (NT) to remove the phrase ‘except with the leave of the court’ to make evidence about the complainant's sexual reputation inadmissible.

This could help to ensure that only necessary evidence is used to determine facts and victims are protected from unnecessary questions, which may retraumatise them further and perpetuate rape myths.

Advice:

The NT Attorney-General and Minister for Justice should amend the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure Act) 1983 (NT) as specified above at the next opportunity.  

Download the 1-Page Brief Here - (NT) Abolish Use of Sexual Reputation Evidence in Sexual .

Download • 88KB

---

Public Support: 

1. Full Stop Australia

2. Australian Law Reform Commission

3. Women’s Legal Service Australia 

Where to go to learn more: 

1. The Committee of the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General (CSCAG) - In a project aimed to provide guidelines for a National Criminal Code, Chapter 5 deals with sexual offences and recommended banning sexual reputation evidence in 1998. Read the chapter here.

2. Australian Law Reform Commission - In the 2010 Family Violence: A National Legal Response Report, ALRC recommended that sexual reputation evidence be made inadmissible in all circumstances. The final report calls for the NT to remove the ability for this evidence to be admitted. Read the report here. 

3. Australian Law Reform Commission - The ALRC’s Reforming Justice Responses to Sexual Violence report, tabled in January 2025, recommended again for the NT to amend section 4(1) to remove the ability for the court to admit evidence based on a complainant’s sexual reputation or history. Read the reasoning behind the recommendation here.

4. Women’s Legal Service Australia - In WLSA’s submission to the ALRC’s inquiry into Reforming Justice Responses to Sexual Violence, they recommend making sexual reputation evidence inadmissible in all circumstances. Read the submission here.

5. How narratives of female sexual agency conceal vulnerability to rape: an analysis from South Australian rape trials - Jennifer Schaffer’s article uses case studies from South Australian rape trials to explore how the use of a complainant’s sexual history can influence the perception of a victim. The paper also describes how this type of evidence intermingles with rape myths. Read the article here.

6. What do we know about rape myths and juror decision-making? Fiona Leverick’s journal article explores how the acceptance of rape myths and victim-blaming narratives impacts jurors’ decision-making in rape cases. Read here. 

7. Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act 1983 (NT) - Read the full Act here.

Human Perspective: Trigger Warning: Sexual assault and rape

When Hannah reported her assault in the Northern Territory, she believed the court would focus on what had happened to her. Instead, it turned the spotlight on her past. The defence argued that her sexual reputation was relevant. Under NT law, the judge agreed, it could be admitted if considered “substantially relevant.” Hannah watched as her private life was laid bare in court. Past relationships, dating history, and even rumours used to question her credibility. It felt less like justice and more like judgment. “I felt like I was the one on trial,” she said. “Not him.” The experience left her retraumatised. She withdrew, avoided people, and questioned ever coming forward. What should have been a path to justice became another form of harm, one written into the law. If section 4(1) of the Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act 1983 (NT) had been amended to ban sexual reputation evidence outright, survivors like Hannah could seek justice without being put on trial for their own past. To protect the anonymity of those involved, this is a fictionalised account drawn from an amalgamation of real-life stories, experiences, and testimonials gathered during the research process for this brief. Any resemblance to actual individuals is purely coincidental.

Conflict of interest/acknowledgment statement: 

N/a

Support 

If your organisation would like to add your support to this paper or suggest amendments, please email Info@foreaustralia.com. 

Reference list: 

Australian Law Reform Commission. (2010). Family violence: A national legal response: Final Report. https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/family-violence-a-national-legal-response-alrc-report-114/27-evidence-in-sexual-assault-proceedings-3/sexual-reputation-and-experience/ 

Australian Law Reform Commission. (2025). Justice responses to sexual violence: Final report. https://www.alrc.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/JRSV-Final-Report-Book-for-Web-final-20250211.pdf#page=388

Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (VIC). https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/vic/consol_act/cpa2009188/s341.html

Evidence Act 1906 (WA). https://www.legislation.wa.gov.au/legislation/prod/filestore.nsf/FileURL/mrdoc_47666.pdf/$FILE/Evidence%20Act%201906%20-%20%5B17-p0-00%5D.pdf?OpenElement

Evidence Act 1929 (SA). https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/sa/consol_act/ea192980/s34l.html

Evidence Act 1977 (QLD). https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/qld/consol_act/ea197780/s103zg.html

Evidence Act 2001 (TAS). https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/tas/consol_act/ea200180/s194m.html

Evidence (Publications and Records) Act 1991 (ACT). https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/act/consol_act/epa1991361/s75.html

Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/whole/pdf/inforce/2025-05-31/act-1986-209#page=214

Full Stop Australia. (2025). Australian Law Reform Commission Inquiry into Justice Responses to Sexual Violence. https://fullstop.org.au/uploads/main/Submissions-Reports/2024/Full-Stop-Australia-ALRC-Submission.pdf

O’Connor, J. (2021). The Longitudinal Effects of Rape Myth Beliefs and Rape Proclivity. Psychology of Men & Masculinities, 22(2), 321-330. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9380434/ 

Schaffer, J. (2023). How narratives of female sexual agency conceal vulnerability to rape: an analysis from South Australian rape trials. Griffith Law Review, 32(2), 335–356. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10383441.2024.2309106 

Standing Committee of Attorneys-General. (2010). Chapter 5: Sexual assault and the law of evidence. Australian Government (archived). https://webarchive.nla.gov.au/awa/20100519122115/http://www.scag.gov.au/lawlink/SCAG/ll_scag.nsf/pages/scag_chapter5

Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act 1983 (NT). https://legislation.nt.gov.au/en/Legislation/SEXUAL-OFFENCES-EVIDENCE-AND-PROCEDURE-ACT-1983legislation.nt.gov.au

Women’s Legal Services Australia. (2024). Submission to the Australian Law Reform Commission Inquiry into Justice Responses to Sexual Violence. https://www.alrc.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/212.-Womens-Legal-Services-Australia.pdf