NSW Parole Regime Reform

The NSW Law Reform Commission has made the following recommendations in its report on the state's parole system -

2. Purpose of parole and design of the parole system

2.1: Retention of parole - Parole should be retained.

2.2: Statement of the primary purpose of parole

(1) The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should include a statement of the purpose of parole along the following lines: The primary purpose of parole is to promote community safety by supervising and supporting the conditional release and re-entry of prisoners into the community, thereby reducing their risk of reoffending.

(2) The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should make clear that parole remains part of the sentence. Such a statement should be located near the new provision that states the purpose of parole.

2.3: A mixed parole system

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should retain the current mixed parole system where automatic parole applies to offenders serving head sentences of three years or less that have a nonparole period and discretionary parole applies to offenders serving sentences of more than three years.

3. Statutory parole

3.1: Introducing a statutory parole model

(1) The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should provide that an offender sentenced to a head sentence of three years or less with a non-parole period must be released on parole at the end of the non-parole period (“statutory parole”), unless the State Parole Authority has revoked parole.

(2) Statutory parole should be subject to the standard conditions of parole set out in Recommendation 9.1.

(3) The Authority should have the same power to impose any additional conditions as it currently has for court based parole orders.

(4) The statutory parole model should replace the court based parole order model in the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW).

3.2: Pre-release revocation of statutory parole

(1) The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should provide that the State Parole Authority may revoke statutory parole (or a court based parole order if court based parole is retained) before an offender is released on parole. This should replace the current cl 222(1) of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Regulation 2014 (NSW).  

(2) The Authority may revoke such parole if: (a) the Authority is satisfied that the offender’s conduct in custody indicates that the risk that the offender would pose to community safety if released on parole outweighs any reduction in risk likely to be achieved through parole supervision of the offender, or (b) the Authority is satisfied that, if released on parole, the offender would pose a serious and immediate risk to his or her own safety, or (c) the Authority is satisfied that satisfactory accommodation or postrelease arrangements have not been made or cannot be made and the risk to community safety posed by the offender’s release on parole outweighs any reduction in risk likely to be achieved through parole supervision of the offender, or (d) the offender requests that the order be revoked.

(3) Corrective Services NSW should develop and publish a robust policy for assessing the suitability of offenders’ proposed post-release accommodation. The policy should focus on risk to community safety and be grounded on the available evidence about the extent to which different types of restrictions on the places offenders may live can reduce the risk of reoffending.

(4) When an offender’s proposed post-release accommodation is assessed as unsuitable, Community Corrections should clearly communicate the reasons for this assessment to the offender or the offender’s legal representative.

(5) Corrective Services NSW should amend its policy to make clear that Community Corrections officers should seek pre-release revocation on the basis of an offender’s accommodation situation only if the absence of arrangements for suitable accommodation indicates that the risk to community safety posed by the offender’s release on parole outweighs any reduction in risk likely to be achieved through parole supervision of the offender.

(6) Corrective Services NSW should evaluate the provision of postrelease accommodation under the Funded Partnership Initiative. The evaluation should assess whether the level of post-release accommodation is adequate to meet requirements.

3.3: Parole for accumulated sentences 

(1) When an offender is sentenced for multiple offences, the effective length of the overall head sentence (whether an aggregate sentence or accumulated sentences) should be used to determine whether the offender should be subject to statutory parole (or court based parole, if retained) or discretionary parole.

(2) In the case of accumulated sentences, where the effective length of the overall head sentence is three years or less: (a) there should be a single date for release on parole that corresponds with the end of the last operative non-parole period (if statutory parole is implemented); or (b) the court should make a parole order that requires release on parole at the end of the last operative non-parole period (if court based parole is retained).

4. Factors guiding the State Parole Authority’s decisions

4.1: Replacing the public interest test

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended to the following effect: The State Parole Authority may make a parole order for an offender if it is satisfied that making the order is in the interests of community safety. In doing so, the Authority must take into account: (a) the risk to community safety of releasing the offender on parole (b) whether parole supervision is likely to aid in reducing the possibility of the offender reoffending (c) the risk to community safety if the offender is released at the end of the sentence without a period of parole supervision, or is released at a later date with a shorter period of parole supervision, and (d) the extent to which parole conditions can mitigate any risk to community safety during the parole period.

4.2: Mandatory considerations

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended so that when the State Parole Authority is making a decision in accordance with Recommendation 4.1 it is required to consider: (a) the nature and circumstances of the offence to which the offender’s sentence relates (b) any relevant comments made by the sentencing court (c) the offender’s criminal history (d) the likelihood that the offender, if released, will reoffend, and the likely seriousness of any reoffending (e) the likely effect on any victim of the offender, and on any such victim’s family, of the offender being released on parole (f) any submissions from any registered victim (g) any report in relation to the granting of parole to the offender that has been prepared by or on behalf of Community Corrections, as referred to in section 135A (h) any other report in relation to the granting of parole to the offender that has been prepared by or on behalf of the Serious Offenders Review Council, the Commissioner or any other authority of the State (i) if the Drug Court has notified the Authority that it has declined to make a compulsory drug treatment order in relation to an offender’s sentence on the ground referred to in section 18D(1)(b)(vi) of the Drug Court Act 1998 (NSW), the circumstances of that decision to decline to make the order, and (j) such other matters as the Authority considers relevant.

4.3: Clarifying the status of the State Parole Authority’s Operating Guidelines

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended to remove the requirement that guidelines under s 185A be developed “in consultation with the Minister”.

4.4: Content of Community Corrections reports

(1) Section 135A of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW), which relates to the content of Community Corrections reports, should be moved to the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Regulation 2014 (NSW).

(2) The new clause should require the pre-release report from Community Corrections to recommend for or against parole.

(3) The new clause should not require the report to address the likelihood of the offender adapting to normal lawful community life.

(4) The new clause should require the report to address any established breaches during a previous period on parole, a period of leave or a community based sentence.

(5) The new clause should require the report to address the offender’s participation in rehabilitation, education, work or other programs in prison. Where relevant, the report should also address the availability or unavailability of such programs and the offender’s willingness or unwillingness to participate.

4.5: The State Parole Authority’s use of risk assessment results

(1) The Community Corrections pre-release report should include the results of any evidence based risk assessment tool used by Corrective Services NSW to assess the offender.

(2) The State Parole Authority members’ professional development program should include training in the value, uses and limitations of risk assessment tools, particularly the Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R).

(3) The requirement in the Authority’s Operating Guidelines that an offender must generally be assessed as low risk before being granted parole should be removed. Instead, the Operating Guidelines should emphasise that risk assessment results should be given weight in accordance with the legislative framework for assessing release on parole set out in Recommendations 4.1-4.4.

4.6: The State Parole Authority’s consideration of security classification

The State Parole Authority’s Operating Guidelines should provide that if an offender has failed to achieve a low level of prison classification, the Authority should, when considering whether to grant parole, take into account: (a) any reasons for the failure to achieve a low level of prison classification, and (b) that an offender with a higher level of prison classification, who otherwise meets the requirements for a grant of parole, could still be regarded as suitable for parole.

4.7: The State Parole Authority’s approach to in-custody rehabilitation programs

The State Parole Authority’s Operating Guidelines should be amended to the following effect: (a) Where an offender has not completed a recommended in-custody rehabilitation program for reasons beyond his or her control, the Authority should not take those reasons into account.   (b) The Authority should take into account an offender’s participation (or lack of participation) only in those programs likely to reduce that particular offender’s reoffending risk, or that prepare offenders to participate in those programs. (c) The Authority should take program participation into account on a case by case basis when making the parole decision. (d) The Authority should consider whether the offender could, without increased risk to the community, complete a recommended program in the community.

4.8: The State Parole Authority’s consideration of external leave participation

The State Parole Authority’s Operating Guidelines about serious offenders or other long term inmates having failed to participate in prerelease external leave should be amended to the following effect: (a) The presumption that serious offenders and other long term inmates should have undertaken pre-release external leave should be removed. (b) In deciding what weight to give to the failure, the Authority should take into account: (i) whether the failure was for reasons beyond the offender’s control, and (ii) whether the offender’s participation in other preparatory or transitional options would be sufficient to prepare the offender for parole.

4.9: Assessing the necessity and suitability of post-release accommodation

Where suitable accommodation is not available for an offender:

(1) Corrective Services NSW policy should state that Community Corrections should comment in the pre-release report on whether such accommodation is necessary to supervise the offender adequately and manage any risk to community safety that the offender poses.

(2) The State Parole Authority’s Operating Guidelines should state that the offender may be released on parole if any risk to community safety can be managed and Community Corrections can provide adequate supervision.

4.10: Parole for offenders likely to be deported

(1) The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should provide that, when considering parole for an offender who may be subject to deportation if released on parole, the State Parole Authority must take into account: (a) the likelihood that the offender will be deported when released on parole, and (b) the risk to community safety in any country the offender may travel to during the parole period if deported.

(2) The current list in the Authority’s Operating Guidelines of factors that the Authority must consider in deportation cases should be deleted.

5. Parole decision making for serious offenders

5.1: Power to declare an offender a “serious offender”

(1) The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should expressly authorise the Commissioner of Corrective Services to declare an offender to be a serious offender and the definition of “serious offender” in s 3(1) of the Act should be amended accordingly.

(2) The definition of “serious offender” in s 3(1) of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended by deleting paragraph (d) which refers to an offender being managed as a serious offender in accordance with a decision of the sentencing court, State Parole Authority or the Commissioner.

5.2: Referring high risk sexual and violent offenders to the Serious Offenders Review Council

(1) Corrective Services NSW should develop a policy to identify those sexual and violent offenders who are likely candidates for an application under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW).

(2) The Commissioner of Corrective Services should declare such offenders to be serious offenders as early in their sentences as is possible.

5.3: Offenders serving redetermined life sentences – repeal of s 154 and s 199

Sections 154 and 199 of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be repealed.

5.4: Matters the Serious Offenders Review Council should take into account when making recommendations to the State Parole Authority

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended so that, when reporting to and advising the State Parole Authority, the Serious Offenders Review Council must have regard to the considerations that the Authority takes into account when it makes a parole decision.

5.5: The Serious Offenders Review Council’s recommendation to the State Parole Authority

Section 135(3) of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be redrafted to state that, except in exceptional circumstances, the State Parole Authority must not make a parole order for a serious offender unless the Serious Offenders Review Council advises that the offender should be released on parole.

5.6: Parole and the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW)

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should state: (a) The State Parole Authority, in deciding whether to: (i) grant parole to an offender, or (ii) rescind a revocation of parole must not take into account the fact that an order under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW) might be made regarding the  offender in future unless the State has made an application for such an order. (b) If the State has made an application under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW) in relation to an offender, but the application has not yet been determined, the Authority may take the application into account. (c) If the Supreme Court has imposed an interim continuing detention order or a final continuing detention order under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW) in relation to an offender, the Authority must not make a parole order, or rescind any revocation of the offender’s parole. (d) If the Supreme Court has imposed an interim supervision order or a final extended supervision order under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW) in relation to an offender, the Authority may take the existence of such an order into account.

6. A new parole decision making process

6.1: Redraft procedural provisions

The provisions of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) that set out the State Parole Authority’s decision making process (Part 6, Division 2, Subdivisions 2 and 3) should be entirely redrafted. The new provisions should more clearly and fully set out the decision making process that the Authority should follow.

6.2: A new parole decision making process

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended so that in deciding whether to grant or refuse parole, the State Parole Authority uses the following process:

(1) The Authority should notify any registered victim of the offender, the Commissioner of Corrective Services and the Attorney General that the offender is due to be considered for parole. The Authority should make arrangements with Corrective Services NSW to achieve this on a day to day basis.

(2) Registered victims, the Commissioner and the Attorney General should be able to lodge a “notice of interest” in the case. Any registered victim should also be invited to make a written submission for the Authority to take into account.

(3) The Authority should then consider the offender’s case at a private meeting and decide whether parole should be granted or refused.

(4) If the Authority decides to grant parole and no “notice of interest” has been lodged, it may make a parole order at the private meeting and impose such conditions as it may determine.

(5) If the Authority decides to grant parole and a “notice of interest” has been lodged, it should record its decision and list the case for a public review hearing.

(6) If the Authority decides to refuse parole at a private meeting, it should notify the offender, provide the offender with the documents on which its decision was based, and advise the offender of his or her right to apply for a review hearing. The offender should be able to make written submissions to the Authority as part of the application.  After it has considered the application, the Authority should list the case for a public review hearing only if it considers that a hearing is warranted. If the Authority does not consider that a review hearing is warranted, it should confirm the refusal and notify the offender.

(7) If the case is listed for a review hearing, the Authority should notify the offender and any party who has lodged a “notice of interest” in the case. The offender should be entitled to appear at the hearing, be legally represented, and make written and oral submissions. Any registered victim who has lodged a “notice of interest” should be entitled to appear and make written and oral submissions. If the Commissioner of Corrective Services or the Attorney General has lodged a “notice of interest”, the Commissioner or the Attorney General should be entitled to appear, be legally represented and make written and oral submissions.

6.3: The Serious Offenders Review Council’s role

(1) If the offender is a serious offender and the Serious Offenders Review Council has recommended against parole for the offender, the State Parole Authority should grant parole only in exceptional circumstances.

(2) If the Authority at a private meeting decides to grant parole to a serious offender against the Council’s advice: (a) The Authority should list the case for a public review hearing. (b) The Authority should provide the Council with reasons for its decision and allow at least 21 days before holding the hearing for the Council to respond in writing to the decision. (c) The Commissioner and the Attorney General should be notified of the hearing and have the right to appear, be represented and to make submissions, regardless of whether they have previously lodged a notice of interest.

(3) If, at a review hearing held to reconsider a decision to refuse parole, the Authority decides to grant parole to a serious offender against the Council’s advice: (a) The Authority should adjourn the hearing and provide the Council with its reasons for reversing the initial decision to refuse parole. (b) The Authority should give the Council at least 21 days to respond in writing before resuming the hearing. (c) The Commissioner and the Attorney General should be notified of the resumed hearing and have the right to appear, be represented and to make submissions, regardless of whether they have previously lodged a notice of interest.

6.4: Victim submissions at hearings

The State Parole Authority should ensure that a registered victim who has lodged a notice of interest is given sufficient opportunity to make oral submissions at any hearing, regardless of whether the Commissioner of Corrective Services or the Attorney General makes submissions opposing parole.

6.5: Commissioner and State submissions

(1) The Commissioner of Corrective Services and the Attorney General should have the right to make written submissions to the State  Parole Authority at any time when it is considering the parole of any offender until a final decision is made. The Authority must consider any such submission.

(2) A final decision by the Authority may be any of the following: (a) making a parole order (b) refusing to hold a review hearing (where parole has been refused at a private meeting) (c) confirming a refusal of parole because the offender has not applied for a review hearing, or (d) refusing parole at a review hearing.

(3) Corrective Services NSW should develop and publish a policy about the situations when the Commissioner should make a submission.

6.6: Revoking discretionary parole orders pre-release

(1) The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should provide that: (a) the State Parole Authority has the power to revoke its own parole order before the offender is released only if: (i) since the order was made, new information is available or the situation has materially changed such that the Authority considers it appropriate to revoke the order (ii) the Authority is satisfied that, if released on parole, the offender would pose a serious and immediate risk to his or her own safety, or (iii) the offender requests that the order be revoked. (b) the following procedures apply to proceedings for such a revocation: (i) the offender, the Commissioner of Corrective Services and the Attorney General may apply to the Authority to exercise this power (ii) applicants may make written submissions as part of the application (iii) the Authority should consider the application and decide whether to exercise the power in a private meeting (iv) if the Authority decides to exercise the power on application from the offender, the Authority should formally record a refusal of parole (v) if the Authority decides to exercise the power on application from the Commissioner or the Attorney General, the Authority should list the matter for a review hearing and notify the offender, the applicant and any party who has lodged a notice of interest, and (vi) at the review hearing, the Authority should consider whether to grant or refuse parole without regard to the previous decision.

(2) Section 172 of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be repealed.

6.7: Minimising technical rules

(1) The State Parole Authority must consider whether to grant parole at a private meeting at least 21 days before the end of the offender’s non-parole period.

(2) The Authority (whether on an initial or subsequent consideration of parole) should be able to defer deciding whether to release an offender on parole: (a) at a private meeting, to a future private meeting, whenever it considers it necessary, but in any case for not more than one month from the date of the first deferral (b) at a review hearing, to a future review hearing, whenever it considers it necessary, but in any case for not more than three months from the date of the first deferral. The separate power to postpone or adjourn a review hearing should no longer be available.

(3) The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended to remove the power of the Authority to “examine” an offender.

(4) The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should provide that, at a review hearing, the Authority must consider whether or not to grant parole without regard to any view taken of the case at the private meeting.

(5) A parole order must authorise the offender’s release on a day within 35 days of: (a) the making of the order, or (b) the end of the non-parole period, whichever is the later day.

7. Other issues in the parole decision making process

7.1: Victims’ access to documents

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended so that a registered victim of an offender being considered for parole (whether or not the offender is a serious offender) is entitled to access documents indicating the steps that the offender has taken, or is taking, in custody towards his or her rehabilitation.

7.2: Keeping registered victims informed

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should require the State Parole Authority to notify a registered victim of an offender that the offender: (a) has been granted parole, and provide a copy of the offender’s parole conditions, or (b) has been refused parole, and indicate when the offender is likely to be next considered for parole. 

7.3: The State Parole Authority’s power to withhold documents

(1) A new provision should be inserted into the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) to address the disclosure of submissions from registered victims to offenders, stating that: (a) the State Parole Authority must not disclose such submissions to an offender unless the victim has consented in writing, and (b) if a victim’s submission is withheld from an offender, the Authority must notify the offender or the offender’s legal representative that the submission has been withheld.

(2) Section 194 of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be substituted by a new provision stating that: (a) the Authority may withhold any material (including any document or part of a document) if, in the opinion of a judicial member, there is a public interest in withholding the material (b) there is a public interest in the Authority withholding material if a judicial member considers that providing the material would: (i) adversely affect the discipline or security of a correctional centre (ii) endanger any person (iii) put at risk an ongoing operation by a law enforcement agency or intelligence agency (iv) adversely affect the supervision of any offender on parole, or (v) disclose the contents of the offender’s medical, psychiatric or psychological reports (c) if the Authority is considering withholding material from an offender (or the offender’s legal representative), the judicial member must be satisfied that the public interest in withholding it outweighs the public interest in procedural fairness for an offender (d) if the Authority withholds material from any person, the Authority must inform the person from whom it is withholding the material that it has done so (e) regardless of whether there has been a request for access to material, the Authority must provide an offender from whom such material has been withheld with as much information about the contents of the material as would enable the offender to understand and respond to the substance of the facts, matters and circumstances which may affect the parole decision and is, in the opinion of the judicial member, consistent with the public interest in withholding the material (f) requires the Authority to withhold the material from any legal representative of any offender, if the Authority withholds, or would withhold, the material from the offender, (g) applies, subject to the exceptions listed here, where the Authority must, under any law, provide any person with access to a report or other material, or where any person requests access to a report or other material in the Authority’s possession (h) applies notwithstanding any law to the contrary, and   (i) does not apply to registered victims’ submissions or to the Minister’s entitlement to access all documents held by the Authority under s 193A(1).

7.4: Plain language information for offenders

(1) The State Parole Authority should develop an information package for offenders about the parole decision making process and the Authority’s procedures. The package should be written in plain language and be as simple as possible. It should be available in English and other relevant languages.

(2) The Authority should review the standard forms and notices it provides to offenders to ensure that the forms and notices are as simple and easy to understand as possible.

(3) Corrective Services NSW should consider how to provide offenders with more non-written information about the parole decision making process, for example by discussion with the offender’s assigned Community Corrections officer or as part of a pre-release preparation program.

7.5: Providing written reasons for the State Parole Authority’s decisions

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended to require the State Parole Authority to provide to offenders, and any registered victims who have lodged a notice of interest, written reasons for its decisions to grant or refuse parole at a private meeting or review hearing.

7.6: Publishing reasons for State Parole Authority decisions

Subject to privacy and security considerations, the State Parole Authority should publish reasons online for all of its decisions to grant or refuse parole. The Authority should prioritise publishing reasons in cases involving serious offenders.

7.7: Parole in exceptional circumstances

Subsections 160(2) and (3) of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be replaced by new provisions that set out a simplified procedure for s 160 applications that is to operate independently of all other procedures relating to the State Parole Authority’s decisions whether to grant parole. The new provisions should provide that: (a) offenders have a right to apply for parole under s 160 (b) the Authority is not required to consider the application if it is satisfied that the application is frivolous, vexatious or has no prospect of success (c) the Authority may, in its discretion, consider the application at a private meeting or at a hearing (d) if the Authority decides to refuse the application at a private meeting, the offender should not be entitled to apply for a hearing to review the decision (e) if the Authority decides to hold a hearing, the Authority must invite the Commissioner, the Attorney General, any registered victim and the offender to make submissions, and (f) if the Authority decides, at a private meeting or at a hearing, that the application should be refused, the Authority must notify the offender of its decision and provide reasons.

8. Membership of the State Parole Authority and Serious Offenders Review Council

8.1: Composition and governance of the State Parole Authority

The parts of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) relating to the composition and governance of the State Parole Authority should be redrafted according to the following requirements: (a) The Authority must have at least 16 members, including at least four judicial members, at least one police member, at least one Community Corrections member, and at least 10 community members. (b) One judicial member should be appointed as Chairperson of the Authority. Another judicial member should be appointed as Deputy Chairperson of the Authority. (c) The Chairperson of the Authority should schedule panels to make the decisions of the Authority. Each scheduled panel should consist of five members: one judicial member, one police member, one Community Corrections member and two community members. The judicial member should preside. (d) If fewer than the 5 members that make up a panel are present at a meeting, the panel may make a decision provided at least one judicial member, one community member and one official member (either a police officer or Community Corrections officer) are present. (e) Each appointing agency for official members may appoint deputies to act in the place of absent official members. (f) The Chairperson of the Authority should have the power to determine how meetings are to be conducted, and also to convene meetings of all Authority members for the purposes of training, communication and professional development.

8.2: Composition and governance of the Serious Offenders Review Council

The parts of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) relating to the composition and governance of the Serious Offenders Review Council should be redrafted according to the following requirements: (a) The Serious Offenders Review Council must have at least eight and no more than 14 members, including at least three judicial members, at least two official members and at least three and no more than nine community members. (b) One judicial member should be appointed as Chairperson of the Council. Another judicial member should be appointed as Deputy Chairperson of the Council. (c) The Chairperson of the Council should schedule panels to make the decisions of the Council. Each scheduled panel should consist of six members: two judicial members, two official members (officers of Corrective Services NSW appointed by the Commissioner) and two community members. The Chairperson (or, if the Chairperson is not present, the Deputy Chairperson) should preside. (d) If fewer than the five members that make up a panel are present at a meeting, the panel may make a decision provided at least one judicial member, one community member and one official member are present. (e) The appointing authority for official members should be able to appoint deputies to act in the place of absent official members. (f) The Chairperson of the Council should have the power to determine how meetings are to be conducted, and also to convene meetings of all Council members for the purposes of training, communication and professional development.

8.3: Merit selection of community members

(1) Community members of the State Parole Authority and the Serious Offenders Review Council should be appointed following an openly advertised formal merit selection process.

(2) In consultation with the Authority and the Council, the NSW Department of Justice should develop standard selection criteria for assessing potential candidates. The Minister for Corrections should approve these criteria.

(3) The Minister for Corrections should appoint a panel (on which the Authority or the Council should be represented) to select community members. The selection panel should recommend candidates for appointment to the Minister. If the Minister accepts the recommendation, the candidate should, subject to Cabinet consideration, be recommended to the Governor for appointment.

8.4: Merit selection of judicial members

The judicial members of the State Parole Authority and the Serious Offenders Review Council should be appointed on the basis of standard appointment criteria. The NSW Department of Justice should develop standard appointment criteria in consultation with the Authority and the Council. The Minister for Corrections and the Attorney General should approve the criteria.

8.5: Community members should reflect the diversity in the community

(1) The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended to provide that State Parole Authority and Serious Offenders Review Council community members must, as far as is practicable, reflect diversity in the community.

(2) A competitive selection process for community members should include consideration of a candidate’s background and the extent to which the appointment of the candidate would contribute to community members reflecting diversity in the community.

8.6: Criteria for appointing community members

The standard selection criteria used for selecting community members should require the person to have knowledge of, or experience working in, the criminal justice system or relevant fields such as social work, mental health or other human services.

8.7: Professional development and performance evaluation for State Parole Authority and Serious Offenders Review Council members

(1) A structured orientation and mentoring process should be developed and implemented for new community members of the State Parole Authority and the Serious Offenders Review Council. The Chairpersons of the Authority and the Council should consider whether a similar or adjusted process would be useful for new judicial and official members.

(2) The Authority should receive adequate funding to hold at a minimum two “policy days” per year for all members’ professional development. As well as covering detailed matters of operating policy, policy days should cover issues such as cross cultural awareness, the experience of offenders with cognitive impairments, and the use of actuarial risk assessment tools in correctional contexts.

(3) The Authority and the Council should develop a system of regular (for example, annual) peer performance appraisals to give members feedback on their performance. Such performance appraisals should be considered during any re-appointment process.

9. Parole conditions

9.1: Standard conditions of parole

(1) The standard condition of parole requiring offenders not to commit any offence should be retained.

(2) Supervision by Community Corrections should be a standard condition of parole. The provisions that deal with the three year limit on the duration of supervision conditions should be removed from cl 218 of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Regulation 2014 (NSW).

(3) The standard condition of parole requiring offenders to “be of good behaviour” should be removed.

(4) The standard condition of parole that offenders must adapt to normal lawful community life should be removed.

9.2: Obligations under the supervision condition

Under the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Regulation 2014 (NSW), the obligations under the supervision condition should be: (a) to obey all reasonable directions of the supervising Community Corrections officer, including, but not limited to, reasonable directions about: (i) reporting to the officer (or the officer’s nominee) and being available for interview (ii) place of residence (iii) participating in programs, interventions and treatment (iv) employment, education and training (v) consenting to third parties disclosing information relevant to monitoring compliance with the parole order  (vi) not associating with any specified person or persons (vii) not frequenting or visiting any specified place or district (viii) observing curfew requirements (ix) alcohol and drug testing, and (x) ceasing or reducing alcohol or drug use (b) to permit the officer to visit the offender at the offender’s residential address at any time and, for that purpose, to enter the premises at that address (c) to notify the officer of any change or intention to change his or her employment: (i) if practicable, before the change occurs, or (ii) otherwise, at his or her next interview with the officer (d) not to leave NSW without the permission of the officer’s Community Corrections manager (e) not to leave Australia without the permission of the State Parole Authority.

9.3: Curfews under the supervision condition

(1) The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Regulation 2014 (NSW) should provide that, if a supervising Community Corrections officer imposes a curfew as an obligation under the supervision condition, the officer may not require a parolee to remain at home for more than 12 hours in any 24 hour period.

(2) Corrective Services NSW should develop a policy about Community Corrections officers imposing a curfew as an obligation under the supervision condition that requires: (a) a supervising officer to obtain permission from a manager before imposing the curfew, and (b) a manager to review the curfew after each month of operation.

9.4: Purpose of reasonable directions

Corrective Services NSW’s Community Corrections Policy and Procedures Manual should state that, to assist in complying with the requirement that they be reasonable, directions should be given to parolees for the purpose of managing risks to community safety and that directions given for other purposes might not be reasonable.

9.5: Information about compliance with parole requirements

Consideration should be given to including in the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Regulation 2014 (NSW) a provision authorising Corrective Services NSW to collect information from third parties about compliance with parole requirements, and authorising third parties to disclose such information to Corrective Services NSW.

9.6: Plain language summary of obligations

Corrective Services NSW should provide plain language summaries of supervision obligations in English and other relevant languages to all supervised parolees. Supervising officers should also use plain language to explain obligations to parolees at the start of the parole period.

9.7: Framework for additional conditions

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended to specify that the State Parole Authority can impose any additional conditions it considers reasonable to: (a) manage the risk to community safety of releasing the offender on parole, including (but not limited to) any conditions that: (i) support participation in rehabilitation programs and assist in managing reintegration, or (ii) give effect to the offender’s post-release plan prepared by Community Corrections (b) take account of the effect of the offender being released on parole on any victim of the offender, and on any such victim’s family, or (c) respond to breaches of parole.

9.8: Exemptions from complying with place restriction or curfew conditions

(1) The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended so that an offender does not contravene a place restriction or curfew condition that has been imposed by the State Parole Authority if the supervising officer permits the offender to do so. Supervising officers should only grant such permission for a limited time and for a specified purpose.

(2) If a supervising officer grants such permission, Corrective Services NSW should inform any relevant registered victim.

10. Breach and revocation

10.1: A graduated system of sanctions

The legislative and policy framework for responding to breaches of parole should incorporate a system of graduated sanctions, as detailed in Recommendations 10.2-10.3. Community Corrections and the State Parole Authority should apply these sanctions in a way that ensures a proportionate, swift and certain response.

10.2: Community Corrections responses to breach

(1) The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should outline the breach response options available to Community Corrections officers to the following effect: In response to a breach, a Community Corrections officer must do one of the following: (a) report the breach to the State Parole Authority with a recommendation that the Authority do one or more of the following: (i) revoke parole (ii) impose home detention (iii) impose electronic monitoring (iv) make any other variation or addition to the conditions (b) impose a curfew on the offender, for no more than a maximum of 12 hours in any 24 hour period   (c) give a reasonable direction to the offender about the offender’s behaviour (d) request that a more senior Community Corrections officer warn the offender (e) warn the offender (f) note the breach and take no further action.

(2) Corrective Services NSW should develop a policy about Community Corrections officers imposing a curfew in response to a breach that requires: (a) a supervising officer to obtain permission from a manager before imposing the curfew, and (b) a manager to review the curfew after each month of operation.

(3) Corrective Services NSW should develop a policy that sets out the circumstances in which a breach must trigger a Community Corrections report to the Authority, and provide a clear framework to guide Community Corrections officers in exercising their discretion when they respond to breaches.

10.3: State Parole Authority responses to breach

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended so that:

(1) In response to a breach of parole, the State Parole Authority may do one or more of the following: (a) revoke parole (b) add a condition to the parole order that requires the offender: (i) to spend time under home detention conditions, or (ii) to be subject to electronic monitoring (c) otherwise vary, add or remove one or more conditions of the order (d) warn the offender, or (e) note the breach and take no further action.

(2) The Authority must not require an offender to spend time under home detention conditions unless it has received a suitability assessment from Community Corrections.

(3) The Authority must not require an offender to spend more than 30 days under home detention conditions in response to a particular breach.

(4) The Authority must not revoke parole for the purpose of obtaining a home detention suitability assessment unless no response other than: (a) an order that the offender spend time under home detention conditions, or (b) revocation would be proportionate.

10.4: New powers to revoke parole in the absence of breach

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should provide that: (a) where there is no breach of parole, the State Parole Authority can revoke parole if it considers that: (i) either (A) the offender poses a serious and immediate risk to the safety of the community or of any individual, or (B) there is a serious and immediate risk that the offender will leave NSW, and (ii) the risk cannot be mitigated by reasonable directions from the supervising officer or by adding or varying parole conditions. (b) a Community Corrections officer can report to the Authority in circumstances where there is no breach with a recommendation that the Authority revoke parole or add or vary parole conditions if the officer considers that: (i) either (A) the offender poses a serious and immediate risk to the safety of the community or of any individual, or (B) there is a serious and immediate risk the offender will leave NSW, and (ii) the risk cannot be mitigated by reasonable directions from the officer.

10.5: No offence of breach of parole

Breach of parole should not be an offence.

11. Breach and revocation: procedural issues

11.1: Clarifying the street time provision

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended to the following effect:

(1) Any days from the date a revocation order takes effect to the date that the parolee is taken into custody in relation to the revocation order must be added to the sentence.

(2) Any extension to the parolee’s sentence must not be longer than the time the parolee had left to serve at the date the revocation order took effect.

11.2: Reviews automatic unless a s 169 inquiry has been held

Reviews should continue to be held automatically following revocation of parole except that, if a s 169 inquiry has been held and parole has been revoked, the State Parole Authority should have the discretion whether to hold a review or not.

11.3: The State Parole Authority should be able to take into account an offender’s behaviour during street time

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should provide that the State Parole Authority can, when deciding whether or  not to rescind a revocation of parole, take into account an offender’s conduct between the date the revocation order took effect and the offender’s return to custody.

11.4 Effect of rescinding a revocation order

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should provide that the effect of rescinding a revocation order is that the grant of parole has effect as if it had not been revoked.

11.5: The State Parole Authority’s power to vary or add conditions after rescission

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended to include a provision that confirms that, when the State Parole Authority rescinds a revocation order, it has the power to impose further parole conditions, or vary any existing conditions in accordance with s 128.

11.6: Grounds for emergency suspensions

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should provide that, on application by the Commissioner of Corrective Services, a judicial member of the State Parole Authority can suspend an offender’s parole only if he or she has reasonable grounds for believing that: (a) the offender poses a serious and immediate risk to the safety of the community or of any individual, or (b) there is a serious and immediate risk that the offender will leave NSW in contravention of the conditions of the parole order.

11.7: Reasons for decisions in revocation matters

The State Parole Authority should review the explanatory letter and revocation notification it sends to offenders to make these as straightforward and easy to understand as possible. The explanatory letter should be organised to include the following information: (a) decision made (b) reasons for the decision, and (c) action that the offender may take.

11.8: Publishing reasons for decisions in revocation matters

The State Parole Authority should work towards publishing reasons online for revocation decisions that it must already record in its minutes, including decisions to: (a) revoke a parole order (b) refuse to revoke a parole order in cases where Community Corrections has recommended that the order be revoked or there has been a submission from the Commissioner or the State, and (c) rescind a revocation order.

12. Further applications for parole

12.1: Power to override the 12 month rule

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended so that, when the State Parole Authority refuses parole or revokes parole: (a) the 12 month rule (which limits subsequent applications for parole) remains in place as the general rule but the Authority should have the power to set an earlier date or a later date (up to three years later) at which the offender may apply for release on parole, and (b) the Authority, when deciding whether to set such another date, must consider: (i) the length of time the offender has left to serve (ii) the interests of any registered victim (iii) the risk that the offender will be released at the expiry of the head sentence without any period of parole supervision, or with a reduced period of parole supervision, and (iv) whether the offender is likely to be ready for parole during the next 12 months.

12.2: Process for “manifest injustice” applications

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended so that: (a) there is a formal avenue for offenders to apply for the State Parole Authority to consider release on parole after an offender becomes eligible for parole, on the basis of manifest injustice (b) the State Parole Authority must consider any such application at a private meeting but may refuse to consider the application if it is satisfied that the application is frivolous, vexatious or has no prospect of success (c) if the Authority decides that to deny an early application for parole would not constitute a manifest injustice, it must give the offender brief reasons, and (d) if the Authority decides that to deny an early application for parole would constitute a manifest injustice, the Authority must determine the offender’s application for parole according to the processes that apply to applications for parole in normal circumstances.

13. Appeals and judicial review of State Parole Authority decisions

13.1: No statutory review by the Supreme Court

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should be amended to remove statutory review by the Supreme Court of State Parole Authority decisions.

14. Case management and support in custody and in the community

14.1: Changes to in-custody case management

(1) Corrective Services NSW should commission an independent review of the implementation of its case management policies.

(2) Corrective Services NSW should review its current policy documents that relate to in-custody management, case management and parole preparation with a view to consolidating, clarifying and simplifying these policies.

(3) Any case management framework that Corrective Services NSW implements should aim to reduce the diffusion of responsibility for case management and parole preparation that currently exists among custodial case officers, case management teams, welfare officers, other services and programs officers and Community Corrections officers.

(4) Corrective Services NSW should review the current system of security classification, with the aim of simplifying and streamlining it.

14.2: Increased transition support through non-government organisations

Corrective Services NSW should evaluate the effectiveness of the Funded Partnership Initiative in assisting offenders with the transition to parole. In particular, the evaluation should consider whether the limited level of “in-reach” and linkage with offenders before they leave custody is sufficient to ensure adequate transition support.

14.3: Improving case management and support for parolees in the community through non-government organisations

(1) Corrective Services NSW should continue its efforts to improve the quality of interactions between Community Corrections supervisors and individual parolees.

(2) Corrective Services NSW should evaluate the Funded Partnership Initiative to determine: (a) whether support is provided for a sufficient period and also the level of unmet demand, and (b) the effect that support provided under the Initiative has on rates of reoffending among parolees.

(3) If the new model of interagency cooperation set up under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW) is successful, the Government should consider extending this model to the management of parolees.

(4) The Government should consider establishing local informal re-entry working groups to address the current gaps and difficulties in managing parolees. The aim of the groups would be to coordinate government agencies better and to improve information sharing and cooperation. Relevant government agencies in each location (including agencies covering housing, health, corrections, mental health, and disability services) should participate. Relevant nongovernment organisations in each location could also participate.

14.4: Evaluating rehabilitation programs

Corrective Services NSW should ensure that all the rehabilitation programs it offers are evaluated for their effectiveness in reducing reoffending. Evaluation should be embedded in the design and funding of future programs in accordance with the NSW Government’s Program Evaluation Framework. An independent individual or agency should be involved in such evaluations, where possible. All evaluations should be published online.

15. Pre-parole programs

15.1: Identify the purpose and objectives of unescorted external leave

(1) Corrective Services NSW should review its unescorted external leave policy with a view to simplifying it, and providing a policy framework that identifies the purpose and objectives of pre-release unescorted external leave programs and the criteria for assessing whether a prisoner should be granted such leave, or more leave, before release on parole.

(2) From early in an offender’s sentence, the need for and timing of unescorted external leave should be considered as part of the case plan, but such leave should only be required if needed to address particular identified issues.

15.2: Volunteer sponsors for day leave

Corrective Services NSW should develop partnerships with nongovernment organisations for providing volunteer sponsors for the day leave program.

15.3: Further evaluation of existing transitional centres

The NSW Department of Justice should evaluate the effectiveness of Bolwara House and the Parramatta Transitional Centre in reducing reoffending and improving outcomes for participating offenders. The evaluation should be used to identify further opportunities for expanding transition centres for female and male prisoners.

15.4: Introduction of a back end home detention scheme

Subject to a positive cost-benefit assessment, Corrective Services NSW should introduce a back end home detention scheme based on Recommendations 15.5-15.12. The scheme should be evaluated to ensure it is cost effective and reduces reoffending.

15.5: No involvement for the sentencing court

The sentencing court should not determine the eligibility of offenders for back end home detention at the time of sentencing.

15.6: The State Parole Authority should decide on back end home detention

The State Parole Authority should determine whether an offender can access back end home detention.

15.7: Limited timeframes for back end home detention

Back end home detention should be available only when an offender: (a) is within the final 12 months of the non-parole period, and (b) has served at least half of the non-parole period.

15.8: No offence based exclusions for back end home detention

A back end home detention scheme should not include any offence based exclusions.

15.9: Include back end home detention in the case plan

Corrective Services NSW should initiate consideration of back end home detention through the case plan process.

15.10: Automatic transition to parole for back end home detainees

(1) Back end home detention should not affect the release date for those offenders subject to statutory (or court based) parole.

(2) For offenders with a head sentence of more than three years, the State Parole Authority should have the power to make a back end home detention order and a parole order at the same time. The parole order should take effect at the end of the offender’s nonparole period.

15.11: Breach and revocation of back end home detention

(1) Back end home detention should be subject to the same standard conditions as are currently prescribed for the sentence of home detention.

(2) In addition to the amendments in Recommendation 3.2, the State Parole Authority’s power to revoke statutory parole before an offender is paroled (currently contained in the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Regulation 2014 (NSW) cl 222) should include a power to revoke statutory parole if it has revoked a back end home detention order.

(3) When the Authority revokes a back end home detention order in respect of an offender with a head sentence of more than three years, the Authority should also be authorised to revoke the existing (but not yet commenced) parole order.

15.12: No restriction on the number of back end home detention considerations

No statutory restrictions should be placed on the number of times an offender can be considered for, or access, back end home detention within the relevant portion of the non-parole period.

16. The problem of short sentences

16.1: Working group on services for offenders who serve short sentences of imprisonment

A working group should be established to investigate the viability of a system for maintaining connections between offenders who serve short sentences of imprisonment and service providers in the community. The working group should include representatives of Corrective Services NSW and government and non-government service providers covering housing, health, mental health, and disability services.

16.2: Sentence administration awareness program

Corrective Services NSW, the State Parole Authority and the Judicial Commission of NSW should develop a program to build the awareness of participants in the criminal justice system about sentencing practice and sentence administration, with a particular emphasis on the issues associated with short sentences of imprisonment.

17. Parole for young offenders

17.1: Separate juvenile parole provisions

Juvenile parole should be dealt with by separate provisions in the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW).

17.2: Children’s Court as decision maker

The Children’s Court should remain the decision maker in the juvenile parole system.

17.3: Principles for the juvenile parole system

An additional principle should apply to the new parole provisions in the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), namely that the purpose of parole for juveniles is to promote community safety, recognising that the rehabilitation and reintegration of children into the community may be a highly relevant consideration in promoting community safety.

17.4: Structuring the juvenile parole system by age

(1) Whether an offender is subject to the juvenile parole system or adult parole system should be determined by the offender’s age as follows: (a) Parole decision making: Regardless of where an offender is detained or in custody, the Children’s Court should deal with offenders under 18 at the time of the parole decision; the State Parole Authority should deal with offenders who are 18 and over at the time of the parole decision. (b) Parole supervision: Administrative arrangements should continue to provide that, as a general rule, Juvenile Justice NSW should supervise offenders on parole who are under 18 and Community Corrections should supervise offenders on parole who are 18 and over. Juvenile Justice NSW and Corrective Services NSW should continue to make practical arrangements to transfer those who turn 18 to Community Corrections supervision. (c) Decision making about breach and revocation: The Children’s Court should deal with parole breaches by offenders who are under 18 at the time of the breach; the Authority should deal with parole breaches by offenders who are 18 and over at the time of the breach.

(2) Offenders who turn 18 during the last 8 weeks of their sentence should generally remain in the juvenile system.

17.5: Design principles to govern the juvenile parole system

In drafting the parole provisions to be included in the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), the following principles should be adopted: (a) Flexibility in when and for what purpose a hearing may be convened by the Children’s Court and in what action the Court can take when considering whether to revoke parole or take alternative action. (b) Limited technicality in revocation procedures, including the removal of features of the adult parole system that are irrelevant to young offenders. (c) Responsiveness in how the Children’s Court can deal with changed circumstances, so that the young offender spends as little time as possible in custody. (d) Clarity, ensuring the legislation reflects the current practice of the Children’s Court as closely as possible.

17.6: A mixed system of statutory parole and discretionary parole

The Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) should provide as follows: (a) A young offender sentenced to a head sentence of three years or less with a non-parole period must be released on parole at the end of the non-parole period (“statutory parole”), unless the Children’s Court has revoked parole. (b) Such statutory parole should be subject to the standard conditions of parole set out in Recommendation 17.8. (c) The Children’s Court should have the same power to impose any additional conditions as it currently has for court based parole orders. (d) The Children’s Court should continue to consider young offenders with head sentences of more than three years for discretionary parole.

17.7: A test for discretionary parole

(1) The Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) should provide that the Children’s Court may grant parole for a young offender if it is satisfied that making the order is in the interests of community safety. In doing so, the Court must take into account: (a) the risk to community safety of releasing the offender on parole (b) whether parole supervision is likely to aid in reducing the possibility of the offender reoffending (c) the risk to community safety if the offender is released at the end of the sentence without a period of parole supervision, or is released at a later date with a shorter period of parole supervision, and (d) the extent to which parole conditions can mitigate any risk to community safety during the parole period.

(2) The proposals in Recommendations 4.2 and 4.4 about the matters to be taken into account when making a parole decision, and the contents of a parole report, should be included in the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), subject to consideration  during drafting to any necessary adjustments to reflect Juvenile Justice NSW and Children’s Court processes.

17.8: Standard conditions and supervision obligations

(1) The Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) should provide that two standard conditions be attached to parole for young offenders: (a) that they not commit any offence, and (b) that they submit to supervision by Juvenile Justice NSW.

(2) The obligations under the supervision condition in the juvenile parole system should be the same as those in Recommendation 9.2.

(3) The Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) should allow the Children’s Court to impose any additional conditions it considers reasonable to: (a) manage the risk to community safety of releasing the offender on parole, including (but not limited to) conditions that: (i) support participation in rehabilitation programs and assist in managing reintegration, or (ii) give effect to the offender’s post-release plan prepared by Juvenile Justice NSW (b) take account of the effect on any victim of the offender, and on any such victim’s family, of the offender being released on parole, or (c) respond to breaches of parole.

(4) The Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) should provide that an offender does not contravene a place restriction or curfew condition that has been imposed by the Children’s Court if the supervising Juvenile Justice NSW officer permits the offender to do so, on the same basis as Recommendation 9.8.

17.9: Options for response to breach and revocation

Bearing in mind Recommendation 17.5, the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) should provide that the Children’s Court: (a) may respond to a failure to comply with the obligations of parole by doing one or more of the following: (i) revoke parole and issue a warrant (ii) revoke parole and issue a notice (iii) issue a notice (iv) vary the conditions of parole (v) warn the offender, or (vi) note the breach and take no further action. (b) may revoke parole if: (i) it is satisfied that an offender has breached parole (ii) an offender has failed to appear when called upon to do so, or (iii) an offender has asked for parole to be revoked.

17.10: Accounting for street time when Children’s Court revokes parole and issues a notice

The Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) should provide that when the Children’s Court revokes parole and issues a notice but does not rescind the revocation, it can decide that the revocation order takes effect, or is taken to have taken effect, on the date on which the review decision is made or on such earlier date as the Court thinks fit.

17.11: Pre-release revocation of statutory parole

The Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) should state that the Children’s Court may revoke statutory parole before a young offender is released if: (a) the Court is satisfied that the offender’s conduct in detention indicates that the risk that the offender would pose to community safety if released on parole outweighs any reduction in risk likely to be achieved through parole supervision of the offender, or (b) the Court is satisfied that, if released on parole, the offender would pose a serious and immediate risk to his or her own safety, or (c) the Court is satisfied that satisfactory accommodation or post-release arrangements have not been made or cannot be made and the risk to community safety posed by the offender’s release on parole outweighs any reduction in risk likely to be achieved through parole supervision of the offender, or (d) the offender requests that the order be revoked.

17.12: A power to revoke in the absence of breach

The Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) should provide that: (a) where there is no breach of parole, the Children’s Court may revoke parole if it considers that: (i) either (A) the offender poses a serious and immediate risk to the safety of the community or of any individual, or (B) there is a serious and immediate risk that the offender will leave NSW, and (ii) the risk cannot be mitigated by reasonable directions from the supervising officer or by adding or varying parole conditions. (b) a Juvenile Justice NSW officer may report to the Children’s Court in circumstances where there is no breach with a recommendation that the Children’s Court revoke parole or add or vary parole conditions if the officer considers that: (i) either (A) the offender poses a serious and immediate risk to the safety of the community or of any individual, or (B) there is a serious and immediate risk the offender will leave NSW, and (ii) the risk cannot be mitigated by reasonable directions from the officer.

17.13: Flexible hearings for Children’s Court

Bearing in mind Recommendation 17.5, the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) should provide that: (a) The Children’s Court may convene a hearing at any time to decide whether to grant parole or to revoke parole. The offender may make submissions at any such hearing. (b) When the Children’s Court revokes parole without having previously convened a hearing: (i) The Court must hold a hearing within 28 days of serving the revocation notice on the offender. (ii) At this hearing, the Court must reconsider the revocation decision and confirm or rescind it. (iii) The offender may make submissions at the hearing. (iv) The Court may adjourn the hearing to a later date.

17.14: Reapplying for release on parole

The Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) should provide that: (a) when the Children’s Court refuses to grant parole or revokes parole (whether before an offender is released or after an offender has been released) the Court must set either: (i) a new parole release date, or (ii) a date on or after which the offender may apply to the Court to be reconsidered for parole. (b) when the Children’s Court has set a date after which the offender may apply for reconsideration of parole: (i) the offender may apply at an earlier date and the Court may consider the application in the following circumstances: (A) where new information has come to light or the situation has materially changed (B) where parole was revoked because the offender did not have access to suitable accommodation or community health services and such accommodation or services have subsequently become available, or (C) where parole was revoked because the offender was charged with an offence but the charge has subsequently been withdrawn or dismissed. (ii) the Court may refuse to consider the application if it considers it is frivolous, vexatious or has no prospect of success.

17.15: Serious offenders in the juvenile parole system

The juvenile parole system should not distinguish between serious offenders and non-serious offenders.

18. Other issues requiring amendment

18.1: Reviews automatic unless a s 162 or s 166 inquiry has been held

Reviews should continue to be held automatically following revocation of a home detention order or an intensive correction order, unless a s 162 (intensive correction order) or s 166 (home detention) inquiry has been held and the home detention order or intensive correction order has been revoked. The State Parole Authority should have a discretion whether to hold a review hearing.

18.2: Hearings about revoked Compulsory Drug Treatment Orders

The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) should not provide for the State Parole Authority to consider parole less than 60 days before the end of the non-parole period where the Drug Court has revoked an offender’s Compulsory Drug Treatment Order.