ABSTRACT
In Australia, four states enable the continued detention of serious sex offenders in prison, rather than a purpose-designed facility, after the conclusion of their prison sentences. This chapter considers two 2010 decisions of the United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC) that have designated new parameters for the preventive detention of serious sex offenders—Fardon v Australia (2010) and Tillman v Australia (2010). In Fardon and Tillman, the HRC found that the detention regimes in two (and by implication all) of the Australian states that adopt the continued detention in prison approach violate human rights enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR): the prohibition against arbitrary detention (Article 9), the guarantee of due process (Article 14), and the prohibition on the retroactive infliction of punishment (Article 15).
