Preventive detention of sex offenders: A comparativelaw perspective

Abstract

In recent decades, criminal justice and mental health legislation across the globe has
sought to manage and prevent the problem of repeat sexual violence. Perhaps some of
the most restrictive measures have heen those aimed at the preventive detention of those
sex offenders thought to pose an elevated risk of re-olfense. This paper examines Sexually
Violent Predator (S VP) legislation, deemed constitutional by the U.S Supreme Court in
Kansas v. Hendricks (1997), and compares (his post-sentence civil commitment scheme
with preventive detention statutes targeted at, or otherwise applicable to, sexual offenders
in several of the Commonwealth nations. Specilically, this paper examines the Australian
Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Ofenders) Act (2003), which was upheld in Artorney-
General (OLD) v. Fardon (2004) and which, similar to SVP legislation in the U.S.
allows for the post-sentence preventive detention of sex offenders deemed to be at high
risk of serious sexual recidivism. Morcover, Chis paper reviews the Dangerous Ofender
legislation in Canada, which allows for indeterminale detention of offenders at sentencing.
as Well as the Dangerous and Severe Personality Disorder (DSPD)) designation in Fingland
which authorizes transfer to secure commitment facilites adose offenders thought to
pose a serious risk of harm to others. A bricl discussion of these alternative schemes
concludes the paper.