This week, reports confirmed that a female prisoner was sexually assaulted by a male prisoner identifying as female inside a Victorian women’s prison. The incident exposes the consequences of policies that prioritise gender identity over biological sex in high-risk custodial settings. Women in prison cannot choose their accommodation. They cannot leave when they feel unsafe. Their protection rests entirely with the state. Victoria’s prisoner placement policies are shaped by the Births, Deaths and Marriages Amendment Act 2019, which allows legal sex self-identification without medical or surgical requirements. That framework has weakened clear safeguards and undermined the safety and dignity of women in custody.
Other jurisdictions have recognised the risk and acted. The Northern Territory has prohibited the placement of male prisoners in women’s correctional facilities. Victoria has refused to take the same step. Victoria now faces a clear decision. It can continue defending policies that have exposed women to harm, or it can restore protections based on biological reality. The Australian Christian Lobby are calling on the Victorian Government to remove male prisoners from women’s prisons and repeal the legislative framework that underpins these policies.
In late breaking news the Victorian Government has ordered a review of transgender prison placement amid safety concerns for female inmates. Corrections Victoria has been told to update policy after public outcry over placement of male-born prisoners in women’s jails, placing greater emphasis on the safety and wellbeing of women inmates. The policy shift marks a significant course correction following public controversy over the incarceration of a transgender woman convicted of sexual offences in a female facility. The review was ordered by Victoria’s Corrections Minister Enver Erdogan, who said that new placement guidelines will require consideration of prisoners’ prior offences and the potential safety risks to other inmates.
He acknowledged that recent events had triggered demands for more robust checks in prisoner classification. Earlier this month, the case of “Hilary Maloney,” a transgender woman convicted of abusing her five-year-old daughter, drew public and parliamentary scrutiny when she was housed in the Dame Phyllis Frost women’s prison. The sentencing judge accepted testimony about Maloney’s gender transition as a mitigating factor, prompting accusations that the system prioritized identity over security. Until now, the Victorian government had maintained that corrections decisions, including inmate placement, fall under the autonomy of Corrections Victoria.
Premier Jacinta Allan denied reversing her earlier stance when the corrections authority was told to “update their policy,” insisting she had not intervened directly.
Under the existing framework, the Corrections Victoria requirement 2.4.1 stipulates that the safety and welfare of both transgender and cisgender prisoners must be the “paramount consideration” in placement decisions. The policy mandates evaluation of risks associated with housing prisoners whose physical characteristics do not align with the gender environment they enter. But women’s advocacy groups have long warned that the state does not publicly track which biological males are housed in women’s prisons, nor whether they have histories of violent or sexual offences.
The recent placement of Maloney—a man convicted of child abuse—intensified demands for transparency and reform. In response, Erdogan said the forthcoming policy update would better balance rights and safety and could alter Maloney’s housing depending on the outcome of risk assessments. The review may also prompt debate about sentencing practices and criteria for prisoner placement across the state.
Source: Compiled by APN from the Australian Christian Lobby and media sources
Print This Post