Harsher Youth Bail Laws Don’t Serve Anyone

In response to an uptick in youth crime, many politicians will widely advocate for implementing ‘tough-on-crime’ policies and approaches to youth justice. Recently, it seems, more and more of these measures are being introduced, with the children at their focus bearing the brunt of a punitive system. Recent years have seen a swathe of these kinds of policies being introduced, one notable example being the Northern Territory’s reduction of the minimum age of criminal responsibility in 2024, where children as young as 10 can now be criminally charged and sentenced to prison.

This amendment, while incredibly harsh in and of itself, was also accompanied by concurrent bail-strengthening reforms. These included expanding the presumption against bail for violent offences, as well as reintroducing the breach of bail as an offence for children. The Northern Territory is not alone in this – several Australian jurisdictions have significantly toughened their bail laws in recent years under the rationale of increasing community safety and keeping offenders off the streets. In 2023, Queensland passed bail reforms which, among other things, allowed children who breached their bail conditions to be charged as an adult – overriding its Human Rights Act in the process. NSW also amended its bail laws in 2024 to refuse bail for teenagers between 14 and 18 years who commit certain crimes, and introduced further reforms in 2025 to introduce a stricter bail test for young people accused of repeat car theft and break and enter offences. Victoria, also in 2025, removed the principle of remand as a last resort for a youth offenders who commit further serious offences while already on bail. And just last week, the NSW government once again announced its intention to extend its punitive youth bail laws for a further two years.

The refusal or lower likelihood of bail as a result of these punitive policies means more time in youth detention, which in turn means that children are increasingly exposed to harmful practices such as solitary confinement, as well as general mental and emotional distress. For First Nations children, the consequences of these harsh laws are even more pronounced, particularly given that First Nations children are already incredibly over-represented in youth detention and often come into contact with the police and the justice system far earlier than non-Indigenous children. Further, for many children, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous, compliance with strict bail orders is often difficult, with offenders feeling that their bail conditions ‘set them up to fail’ by making it hard to live a normal life such as attending school or spending time with friends or family. Harsher conditions mean that more children end up in detention for bail non-compliance, as opposed to committing a new offence. This means more children in prison, and fewer children getting the help they really need.

Despite the recent influx of these ‘tough on crime’ policies, the evidence has shown time and again that they simply do not work. More children in prison mean more children exposed to harm and, more often than not, more reoffending, which further erodes the community safety which these policies are claiming to protect. Harsher bail laws are not the answer to increasing youth crime; early intervention and rehabilitative community programs are far better suited to actually addressing the drivers of juvenile offending and ensure community safety. To truly commit to reducing youth crime, government responses and policies must commit to investing in communities and adopting evidence-led approaches to youth crime. Anything else is a disservice to both our children and our communities.