Convicted offenders will not be able to rely on evidence of their ‘good character’ in sentencing proceedings. 

‘Good character’ has been a key mitigating factor in New South Wales (NSW) sentencing. It suggests that the offence was out of character, reflected less moral blame and reduced reoffending risk. 

The High Court confirmed this in Ryan v The Queen (2001). Courts had to consider good character references, but judges decided on the weight. 

‘Good character’ was established through written character references or, in the higher courts, by witnesses providing testimony in courtrooms.

However, following the NSW Sentencing Council’s July 2025 review and strong public pressure, the government introduced the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment (Good Character at Sentencing) Bill 2026. The bill removes ‘good character’ as a mitigating factor for all offences once the bill is passed. In practice, this means no more character references in court, reducing trauma for victims and ensuring more consistency in sentencing.

Sentences may be slightly longer in cases when ‘good character’ previously helped, but remorse, rehabilitation efforts, and lack of prior convictions still count. It is important to note that this change only applies to New South Wales state offences. 

For Commonwealth offences such as fraud, drug importation, and terrorism, federal law still rules. Under section 16A(2)(m) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), courts must consider the offender’s character. So ‘good character’ evidence remains relevant in federal cases heard in NSW. But for state offences, reputation alone will no longer reduce a sentence. 

Child sexual offenders are already restricted from relying on ‘good character’ or a lack of previous convictions if those factors assisted the person in committing the offence. This is also known as the ‘special rule’.

Courts are still able to consider evidence relating to relevant factors, including a person’s prospects of rehabilitation and the likelihood of reoffending. A lack of previous convictions will also remain as a mitigating factor, but will not be able to be used to demonstrate that a person is of ‘good character’.

About Post Author

Brian Walker

B.Acc., GradDipLegPrac, Juris Dr
Barrister & Accountant.
Former Criminal Defence Solicitor. Former Federal Prosecutor for the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions prosecuting Commonwealth crimes relating to drugs and child exploitation. Former Australian Federal Police member litigating proceeds of crime matters. Former Australian Taxation Office employee investigating offshore tax evasion matters.

Post Created by Jesslyn Duong, paralegal.

See author's posts