Responsibility: State and territory governments
Response:
NSW: Accept
ACT, QLD, WA: Accept in principle
SA, TAS, VIC, NT: Subject to further consideration
Australian Capital Territory
Response: Accept in principle
Status: In progress
What has been achieved to date
The ACT Government made a commitment to examine the diversion of people with disability away from criminal justice proceedings in 2019 as part of the Disability Justice Strategy First Action Plan.
In 2022, a working group was established to address the over-representation of people with disability in the ACT criminal justice system. This work is continuing into the Second Action Plan with examination of diversion options at various stages of the criminal justice system.
ACT government response July 2024
The ACT Government accepts this recommendation in principle, noting that the development and implementation of any diversionary program would be subject to signification additional investment, and would likely require legislative change. An examination of options to divert people with disability from the criminal justice system occurred during the First Action Plan of the ACT Disability Justice Strategy (DJS) 2019-2029. This work will continue into the Second Action Plan, with additional framing provided by this recommendation.
New South Wales
Response: Accept
Status: In progress
What has been achieved to date
An outcomes evaluation and economic analysis of the Justice Advocacy Service (JAS) Diversion service commenced in December 2024. The NSW Government has engaged:
- The NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR) to conduct the quantitative and economic analysis of JAS Diversion
Professor Emerita Leanne Dowse to conduct the qualitative analysis of JAS Diversion. Professor Dowse has extensive research experience relating to people with cognitive disability who are in contact with the criminal justice system.
NSW government response July 2024
NSW Government supports evidence-based programs to better support people with disability and reduce inappropriate contact with the criminal justice system.
The Justice Advocacy Service (JAS) is funded by the NSW Government to support people with a cognitive impairment in contact with the NSW criminal justice system.
The NSW Government is undertaking an evaluation of the JAS diversion program and, subject to the outcome of the evaluation, will explore options to expand the JAS diversion program to more NSW Local Courts.
Northern Territory
Response: Subject to further consideration
Status: Subject to further consideration
What has been achieved to date
This recommendation will continue to be considered in broader policy and legislative work on approaches to people with a disability in the criminal justice system.
NT government response July 2024
The Northern Territory Government acknowledges the significance of court-based diversion programs for people with disability facing charges of summary offences. Drawing upon the precedent set by the Northern Territory's Community Youth Diversion Programs, run in regional and remote areas, which prioritise cultural sensitivity, the Northern Territory Government demonstrates its commitment to inclusivity and accessibility. Recognising the importance of independent evaluation, an assessment of the Community Youth Diversion program was finalised in June 2024. The recommendations will inform the scope of services, including health and allied health services procured to operate as early intervention strategies for people with cognitive disability. In addition, the Northern Territory Government is establishing standalone legislation for defendants and offenders undergoing trial for criminal offenses, with ongoing resource allocations to support legislative amendments. In this context, the Northern Territory Government will duly consider the existing initiatives within our jurisdiction, ensuring a comprehensive approach to addressing the needs of defendants with disability within the criminal justice system.
Queensland
Response: Accept in principle
Status: In progress
What has been achieved to date
The Queensland Department of Justice implemented the pilot disability stream for adults as part of the Court Link program in the Brisbane Magistrates Court following consultation with key stakeholders. The pilot commenced in January 2025.
QLD government response
The Queensland Government remains committed to implementing the recommendations of the Disability Royal Commission. The Queensland Government has updated its responses to a range of Disability Royal Commission recommendations to reflect contemporary Queensland Government policy and commitments.
2025 Response
The Queensland Government supports in principle the recommendation to develop and fund court-based diversion programs for people with disability charged with summary offences in local or magistrates courts.
Queensland will pilot a disability stream as part of the Court Link program in the Brisbane Magistrates Court.
South Australia
Response: Subject to further consideration
Status: Subject to further consideration
What has been achieved to date
The South Australian Government remains committed to considering this recommendation further, and will provide a response in due course.
SA government response July 2024
The South Australian government has a number of court diversion programs that aim to provide support to defendants to prevent reoffending. Further consideration is needed to understand how the current programs in South Australia could be expanded to connect existing programs through the NDIS, education, housing and employment services.
Tasmania
Response: Subject to further consideration
Status: Subject to further consideration
What has been achieved to date
The Tasmanian Department of Justice is currently considering this recommendation as part of its consideration of recommendations by the Tasmania Law Reform Institute in its Review of the Defence of Insanity in s16 of the Criminal Code and Fitness to Plead.
In May/June 2025, the Tasmanian Department of Premier and Cabinet will be releasing the Youth Justice Diversionary Services Framework, which provides criteria and expectations for diversionary service providers, as well as highlighting several priority areas in need of diversionary services. The current draft includes children and young people with disability as a priority area.
Following the release of the Framework a review of police cautions, and community conferences will commence.
TAS government response July 2024
The Tasmanian Government needs to further consider what this recommendation means for Tasmania.
The Tasmanian Government currently has a court-based diversion program operated through the Magistrates Court of Tasmania. The Tasmanian Government needs to consider how expansion of this program would work.
The Tasmanian Government also needs to consider court-based diversion programs for younger people with disability through Youth Justice.
Victoria
Response: Subject to further consideration
Status: Subject to further consideration
What has been achieved to date
This recommendation will be considered in broader policy work on therapeutic courts and specialist or mainstream approaches to people with a disability in the criminal justice system. Costings would be determined as part of that future work.
VIC government response July 2024
We will consider this recommendation further.
We will consult with Victorian courts. This includes determining any future funding needed to implement the recommendation.
Western Australia
Response: Accept in principle
Status: In progress
What has been achieved to date
8.21 The WA Department of Justice facilitates two court-based therapeutic programs for people with cognitive disability. The Western Australian Government has committed funding through to 30 June 2026 to expand and enable the Pilot In-Roads Court Program, which provides an alternative to detention for young people who have pled guilty to criminal charges in the Children’s Court. In-Roads has a focus on identifying and diagnosing cognitive disability and in providing advocacy and supports arising from such diagnoses. The Intellectual Disability Diversion Program (IDDP) seeks to address the overrepresentation of people with an intellectual or cognitive disability, or autism spectrum order, within the criminal justice system by addressing their offending behaviour and support arrangements. The IDDP is delivered within the Perth Magistrates Court.
8.21a Court and Tribunal Services, in consultation with the Western Australian Office of Crime Statistics and Research, has developed a framework to support evaluations of five of Western Australia’s Specialist Courts, including the IDDP. In-Roads will also be subject to an evaluation which will inform Government as to its ongoing funding.
WA government response July 2024
The WA Government accepts in principle this recommendation. Implementation is underway.
What the Disability Royal Commission said in the final report
The New South Wales, South Australian, Victorian and Western Australian governments should review and fund their existing court-based diversion programs for people with cognitive disability charged with offences that can be heard in local or magistrates’ courts to ensure the programs:
- are accessible and culturally appropriate, particularly in regional and remote areas
- provide support for defendants to access the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS)
- satisfy service needs, including connecting defendants to appropriate education, housing, employment and other services.
The Australian Capital Territory, Northern Territory, Queensland and Tasmanian governments should develop and fund court-based diversion programs for people with disability charged with summary offences in local or magistrates’ courts which:
- are accessible and culturally appropriate, particularly in regional and remote areas
- provide support for defendants to access the NDIS
- satisfy service needs, including connecting defendants to appropriate education, housing, employment and other services.
All states and territories should commission independent evaluations of their diversion programs. Any evaluation should assess and, where feasible, quantify economic and social benefits for both individual defendants and the community as a whole.
More recommendations
View progress on other recommendations made by the Royal Commission.