Significantly fewer children in New South Wales (NSW) have been held responsible for serious crimes—like arson, robbery and murder—in the past nine years after a landmark High Court decision in 2016.
A new study suggests this could the problem for authorities in Australia’s most populous state trying to deal with youth crime and reduce harm to the community.
However, the number of young people in this cohort still being charged by police has not changed.
At the same time, prosecutors have actively withdrawn charges, from 12 percent in 2015-16, to 53 percent in 2022-23.
In addition, the percentage of children pleading guilty fell from 54 percent in 2015-16, to 14 percent in 2022-23.
The report also noted that the declining trend of “proven outcomes” in NSW mirrored patterns in Victoria and South Australia, which have fallen from 75 to 7 percent, and from 41 to 8 percent, respectively.
What Changed Under the High Court Decision
In Australia, where the criminal age of responsibility in most states has not been raised to 14, children aged 10-13 can be found guilty of crimes.However, they are protected under the common law presumption of “doli incapax,” where children are presumed not guilty of a crime because they are assumed to be incapable of distinguishing right from wrong.
In the case RP v R in 2016, the High Court ruled that to rebut the doli incapax presumption, prosecutors must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the underage offender understood that what they were doing was “seriously wrong.”
“The High Court further clarified that the prosecution cannot assume that the child knew their actions were ‘seriously wrong’ based on how their actions were ‘obviously wrong,’ and that the prosecution must provide proof that goes beyond merely showing that the child committed the offence,” the report said.
“This clarification was significant because previous cases had suggested that doli incapax was easier to rebut when the actions of the accused were more ‘obviously wrong.’”
Getting More Difficult to Convict Children: BOCSAR Director
According to BOCSAR Executive Director Jackie Fitzgerald, the High Court decision likely resulted in greater difficulty convicting younger children, which was reflected in the declining stats across the board.“States which have defined doli incapax in legislation, such as Queensland, Western Australia and Tasmania, have not shown a similar decline”.
The director also noted that the ruling raised questions about how to support underage offenders to reduce future harm to themselves and the community.
“Many young offenders desist from criminal behaviour of their own accord and require minimal intervention,” he said.
“However, a small number of very young people engage in serious crimes and can continue offending through adolescence and into adulthood.
“It is important that these individuals receive appropriate interventions, either within the justice system or outside it, to reduce criminal involvement and improve their long-term outcomes.”
A System That Puts Criminal Rights on Equal Footing to Victims
In recent years, children’s rights advocates, legal groups, and even governments have voiced their support for abolishing punishment for young people by raising the criminal age of responsibility.These groups often cite arguments like the immature cognitive development of young people, their capacity to understand right from wrong, the potential for higher re-offending among sentenced children, and international laws on children’s rights.
In contrast, discussion on victim’s rights can often be limited.
“Since antiquity, murder has been punishable by death. But today, some countries and territories have abolished capital punishment on such grounds as ‘humanity,’ ‘tolerance,’ or a supposed respect for life,” the authors wrote.
“Under the influence of twisted liberalism and progressivism, some people give undue weight to prisoners’ rights—no matter the severity of their crimes—while remaining strangely silent regarding the victims.
“If a murderer is fed and housed by taxpayer money, his loss of freedom is hardly a fair trade for the death of the victim and the trauma it causes for loved ones.”
At the same time, the series says criminology now places far more weight on external social conditions, rather than personal responsibility.
“A person has the right and freedom to choose his ideas, speech, and actions. He also needs to be responsible for his own choices,” the series says. “Once a person has committed a crime, he should be punished accordingly. This is the principle of justice.”
Queensland’s Harsher Penalties Bringing Down Youth Offending
Following the election of the centre-right Liberal National Party in Queensland in October 2024, the state quickly introduced the “Adult Crime, Adult Time” laws to tackle its growing youth crime problem.In late March 2025, the Queensland government announced an expansion to the range of crimes that attract “adult time” penalties.
At the same time, it revealed a noticeable drop in major crimes committed by young people.
In addition, the number of adolescents facing charges decreased by 756 cases compared to the same period in 2024.
“What that translates to is about 450 fewer Queenslanders had their car pinched, and 1,033 fewer people had their homes broken into,” Queensland Premier David Crisafulli told 7 News.
“We are serious about driving down what is a youth crime crisis in this state.”
While the premier welcomed the initial result, he said the state still had a long way to go.
He also criticised the former Labor government for weakening the state’s criminal laws during the past decade years, notably in 2019, the presumption of bail for young offenders was introduced—meaning judges must consider a “presumption in favour of release” for young offenders.
This law was reversed in 2021 by the same government.
“Ten years ago, the laws got weakened. Piece by piece, they got a little weaker,” Crisafulli said.
“It’ll take time to turn around, but I assure you every change [we make] will be strengthening the law.”
