NSW abolishes good character as a mitigating factor at sentencing.

What is changing about good character in NSW sentencing?

For a long time, a court sentencing an offender in New South Wales could take the offender's good character into account as a factor that reduced the sentence. The idea was simple. A person of otherwise good character, with a clean record and standing in the community, was thought to be less deserving of the full weight of punishment, and the offending was treated as more likely to be a departure from how the person normally behaved.

The Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment (Good Character at Sentencing) Act 2026 (NSW) removes good character as a mitigating factor. Its long title is an Act to amend the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 to prevent good character being taken into account as a mitigating factor in determining an appropriate sentence. The Act is Act No 10 of 2026. It was passed by both Houses on 12 May 2026, assented to on 18 May 2026, and published in the Government Gazette on 22 May 2026.

One point to hold onto at the outset. The Act had not commenced at the date of writing. It starts on a day appointed by proclamation. Until the proclamation is made, the old law still governs every sentence in NSW. This article explains the old position, what the new law does, what still counts, and why the reform was made.

What did the law say about good character before the reform?

The mitigating factors a NSW court may take into account are listed in section 21A(3) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. Good character sat among them. So did the absence of any record, the offender's remorse, good prospects of rehabilitation, and a low likelihood of reoffending. The list is not closed; a court can also weigh matters at common law.

The leading authority on good character in sentencing is Melbourne v The Queen (1999) 198 CLR 1 in the High Court of Australia. The Court confirmed that good character is a matter a sentencing court is entitled to weigh, though the weight varies with the case. A person of prior good character does not receive a fixed discount. The court decides how much the good character counts on the facts before it.

There was already one large exception. In 2008, NSW inserted a rule that good character could not be treated as mitigating in a child sexual offence where the offender's good character or lack of a record helped them commit the offence. The classic example is a person who used their standing to gain access to a child. The 2026 reform builds on that earlier step and takes it much further.

Does the change apply to all offences or only sexual offences?

This is the question most people are searching. The 2008 rule was confined to child sexual offences and to the situation where the good character assisted the offending. The 2026 reform came out of a broader NSW Sentencing Council recommendation to stop good character being used in mitigation across the board.

The Bill was debated at length and amendments were made in the Legislative Council before it passed. The precise reach of the final Act, and any carve-outs, are set by the amending words as passed. Anyone advising on a live matter should read the current text of section 21A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 once the amendment is in force, rather than rely on a summary. The direction of the reform is clear: good character, standing alone, is no longer a route to a lower sentence.

Does good character still count for anything at sentencing?

Yes, but not as good character on its own. Several matters that often travel with good character remain available to the court, and they are treated as separate factors. The absence of a criminal record is one. Good prospects of rehabilitation is another. Genuine remorse is a third. A finding that the offender is unlikely to reoffend is a fourth.

The change is one of framing and of proof. A court can no longer reduce a sentence simply because the offender is, in general terms, a good person. What the court can still do is consider the offender's record, their rehabilitation, their remorse, and their risk of reoffending, each on its own merits and on evidence. The practical work at sentence shifts from painting a picture of a good person to showing, with material, that the person will not offend again and is on a path away from crime.

How does this affect character references?

Character references do not vanish. What changes is the job a reference has to do. A reference written only to say that the offender is a fine person of good standing carries less weight after the reform. A reference that speaks to remorse, to insight into the offending, to steps already taken toward rehabilitation, and to the low risk of reoffending, is aimed at the factors that survive.

We set out how a useful reference is written in our note on character references at sentence. The short version is that a reference should be specific, should acknowledge the offending, and should say something the court can use. After this reform, a reference that only lists a person's virtues will do little.

Why is NSW removing good character as a mitigating factor?

The reform followed a report by the NSW Sentencing Council. The Council heard from victims who described the experience of hearing an offender called a person of good character in open court as retraumatising. Victims said the good character evidence seemed to minimise the harm and to treat the offender's reputation as more important than what had been done to them.

The Council also raised a fairness concern. Good character is a vague idea without a settled meaning. Some offenders have far easier access to credible references than others. The Council found that this advantaged those with social standing and professional networks, and that a factor of that kind risked unequal outcomes. Weighed against these problems, the Council did not find enough justification for keeping good character as a stand-alone mitigating factor.

The reform has its critics. Some say it narrows judicial discretion and makes it harder for a judge to tailor a sentence to the person in front of them. Some warn it may push sentences higher across the board. Those are questions the courts and the Parliament will keep testing as the change beds in. The article records both sides so readers can weigh them.

When does the good character sentencing change start?

The Act commences on a day appointed by proclamation. It was assented to on 18 May 2026, but assent is not commencement. At the date of writing, no proclamation had brought the amendment into force, so the old section 21A still applied to every sentence in NSW.

This matters in practice. A sentence proceeding is governed by the law in force on the day of sentence, subject to any transitional rule in the amending Act. If you are being sentenced now, the current law applies. If your sentence falls after the proclamation date, the new law applies. Anyone with a matter listed in the coming months should confirm the commencement date and check whether the amending Act contains a transitional provision that fixes which sentences are affected.

Does the ACT still allow good character in sentencing?

The NSW reform changes NSW law only. In the Australian Capital Territory, sentencing runs under the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT). Section 33 of that Act lists the matters a court considers, and they include the offender's character, antecedents and prospects. An offender sentenced in the ACT is dealt with under the ACT framework, and the NSW change has no direct effect there.

The firm acts in both jurisdictions. A person charged in Canberra and a person charged in Sydney face different sentencing rules on this point, and the difference is now larger than it was. That is worth knowing when a matter could be heard in either place, or when an offender has connections across the border.

What this means for a person facing sentence.

The plea in mitigation does not become less important. It changes shape. The work moves from good character as a headline to the factors that still carry weight: a clean record, remorse that is real and shown, insight into the offending, and a plan for rehabilitation that a court can believe. Reports from a psychologist, evidence of treatment or counselling, steps taken since the charge, and stable work or study all speak to those factors.

The other sentencing principles are untouched. The De Simoni principle, the totality principle, the guilty plea discount, and the material in a pre-sentence report all continue to do their work. Good preparation of a sentence is now more, not less, important, because a court has one fewer general factor to draw on in the offender's favour.

Frequently asked.

Is good character still a mitigating factor at sentencing in NSW?

Not once the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment (Good Character at Sentencing) Act 2026 (NSW) commences. The Act was passed and assented to in May 2026 and starts on a date fixed by proclamation. Until then, the old law in section 21A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 still applies and good character remains a factor the court may take into account.

Does the change apply to all offences or only sexual offences?

A narrower restriction on good character for child sexual offences has existed since 2008, where the good character helped the offender commit the offence. The 2026 reform grew out of a NSW Sentencing Council recommendation to remove good character as a mitigating factor across the board. The precise reach and any carve-outs are set by the amending Act as passed. Check the current text of section 21A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 before relying on it.

Can I still hand up character references at sentencing?

References can still be relevant to matters the court may consider, such as remorse, prospects of rehabilitation, and the likelihood of reoffending. What changes is that a court cannot treat good character on its own as a reason to reduce the sentence. A reference aimed only at proving the offender is a good person carries less weight than one that speaks to rehabilitation.

What character-related factors survive at sentencing in NSW?

The absence of a criminal record, good prospects of rehabilitation, remorse, and a low likelihood of reoffending remain matters the court can weigh. These are treated separately from good character in section 21A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

Does the ACT allow good character as a mitigating factor?

The ACT sentences under the Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT). Section 33 sets out the matters a court considers, which include the offender's character, antecedents and prospects. The NSW reform does not change ACT law. An offender sentenced in the ACT is dealt with under the ACT framework.

Primary sources: the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment (Good Character at Sentencing) Bill 2026 on the NSW Parliament website; the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) on the NSW legislation register; and Melbourne v The Queen (1999) 198 CLR 1 on JADE.

To speak to a criminal defence lawyer, call Aaron Kernaghan on 0421 717 019.

This article is written by Aaron Kernaghan, criminal defence lawyer at Brady & Associates Lawyers, as at 4 September 2026. It is commentary and reflects the personal opinion of the author only. It is not legal advice, it is not a substitute for advice on your own matter, and it does not purport to be accurate or complete. The law described commences by proclamation and its provisions should be checked against the current legislation before they are relied on. For advice on a specific matter, contact Aaron Kernaghan on 0421 717 019 or contact the firm.

More criminal-law commentary by Aaron Kernaghan.

← Back to all news