VIC Faster Committal Hearings and Stronger Witness Protections

Justice Legislation Amendment (Committals) Bill 2024

25 Feb 2025: Passed by Parliament and signed off by the governor.

This bill kicks in: TBA

Legislative Assembly

Legislative Council

Assent

Share this bill

Email Facebook X Bluesky

Topics

committal proceedings court process criminal procedure cross-examination family violence sexual offences witness protection

Introduced by: The Hon Anthony Carbines MP (ALP); The Hon Jaclyn Symes MLC (ALP)

Links to official parliament websites

Official page: progress through parliament

Effects of this bill

If this bill passes, it means that:

The existing “committal test” (where a magistrate determines whether sufficient evidence exists to send an indictable offence to trial) will be abolished.
Adults and other relevant persons will be more routinely allowed to appear via audiovisual link (AVL) at committal proceedings, reducing the need for physical court presence.
The default process for cross-examination of witnesses at the committal stage in sexual offence, family violence and stalking cases will be prohibited, meaning such witnesses will not be cross-examined twice (once in committal, again at trial).
For other cases (outside those categories) the threshold (“test”) for a magistrate to grant leave for cross-examination at committal will be strengthened (i.e., tougher criteria).
There will be provision for “early committal” of certain serious cases (for example to the Supreme Court) so that the case moves faster in the justice system.
The overall committal process will be streamlined — reducing duplication, shortening timeframes, reducing pre-trial hearings — with the aim of reducing delays and trauma for victims/witnesses.

News articles and press releases

ChatGPT Comment - context about recommendations not being included

ChatGPT 5.1 — 2025-11-18

Though some of the recommendations of the Victorian Law Reform Commission’s 2020 report will be implemented, the bill does not adopt all of them (for example, the proposal to empower Magistrates and Children’s Courts to discharge indictable charges if no reasonable prospect of conviction was not adopted). [...] The recommendation was to equip Magistrates/Children’s Courts with a power to discharge an accused when there is no reasonable prospect of conviction (as a safeguard). That recommendation was not included in the Bill. The government’s publicly stated reason (or as captured in debate) is fairly limited — the government apparently considered that reinstating such a power would risk bringing back an undesirable “filter/test” model of committals, undermining the reform to streamline. But the Hansard shows critics saying the government “has not provided a sufficient explanation” for leaving it out.