Photos of a Muslim woman without her hijab or of a transgender person before their transition could be considered in the same category as "revenge porn" if shared without consent, in a draft bill to be tabled in the ACT's parliament this week.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The ACT Greens will introduce rival legislation to give the courts new powers to order the take-down of intimate images and protect victims of "stealthing".
Last month the Canberra Liberals moved to outlaw the practice of "revenge porn" - sharing intimate images without consent - and released details of new legislation for public comment. The bill was expected to be tabled in the ACT Legislative Assembly on Wednesday.
The Liberals' bill, modelled on legislation from Victoria, imposes penalties of up to two years in prison for distributing "intimate" images of someone, if the distribution is "an indecent invasion of privacy". An offender can also be jailed for up to a year for threatening to distribute an intimate image.
But the Greens want to go further by creating a new section of the Crimes Act to directly address invasions of privacy through technology.
Greens MLA Caroline Le Couteur said the model they put up would better define "intimate images".
They chose not to focus specifically on "revenge porn" as they felt it was too narrow and implied the victim was at fault.
"We have a wider definition of the images we're talking about than Mr Hanson who is focusing on sexual images," Ms Le Couteur said.
"One example we talked about is a photo of a Muslim woman who would normally wear her hijab and her community expects her to wear her hijab but if she is photographed not wearing that in an outside situation where her community would expect her to wear that she would regard that as an intimate image even though if you or me had that photograph taken we wouldn't find it objectionable.
"Another example I've heard is a transgender person may well find photographs of them prior to transitioning are very confronting for them and they would potentially come under this definition."
Their bill would make it a crime to distribute, or threaten to distribute these "intimate" images of a person without their consent.
It would create a new power for the courts to order the take-down or rectification of intimate images that have been distributed non-consensually.
It would also clarify the law around child pornography, so "sexting" between minors would not lead to prosecution, based on the "two-year rule" for sexual offences.
But the bill would also create a new provision that would protect victims from "stealthing", a practice where one sexual partner covertly removes a condom, when consent has been given by the other partner on the condition a condom is used.
This breach of trust would be included as a factor that negates consent.
Canberra Liberals' attorney-general spokesman Jeremy Hanson said while stealthing was a serious issue, it was wrong to package it with revenge porn.
"It lumps quite important but separate issues together," Mr Hanson said.
Ms Le Couteur said at their core, both issues came back to consent.
"That's the point that ties them together," she said.
Mr Hanson said feedback on their exposure draft had "enhanced" their bill significantly.
Like the Greens' bill, it now included take-down powers for the courts.
However it would give the Director of Public Prosecutions the discretion on whether to charge minors with child pornography for consensual image sharing rather than introducing a "two-year rule".
South Australia and Victoria have both legislated against image-based abuse, also known as "up-skirting", "down-blousing", "sextortion" or "revenge porn". New South Wales, Western Australia and the Northern Territory have legislation in the works.
More than 500 people signed a petition in favour of criminalising "revenge porn".
