Legal Q&A – No Body, No Parole

Your browser window currently does not have enough height, or is zoomed in too far to view our website content correctly. Once the window reaches the minimum required height or zoom percentage, the content will display automatically.
Alternatively, you can learn more via the links below.

Hi there, thank you for your question. This information comes from the NSW State Parole Authority:
Under the No Body, No Parole legislation, the NSW Commissioner of Police must provide the NSW State Parole Authority a written report evaluating an offender’s level of co-operation and assistance in identifying the victim’s body or remains.
The legislation applies retrospectively, i.e. for any parole decision made after October 2022, regardless of when the homicide offence or conviction occurred.
Community safety is the Parole Authority’s highest priority when making decisions about releasing inmates on parole.
The Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 states the State Parole Authority must not make a parole order if it is not satisfied that it is in the interest of community safety.

Following the “no body no parole” amendment, the State Parole Authority is required to have regard to the written advice of NSW Police about the offender’s level of cooperation and assistance concerning the location of the victim.
This includes an evaluation of the timeliness of the offender’s cooperation; the truthfulness, completeness and reliability of information or evidence provided and the significance and usefulness of the offender’s cooperation.
Therefore, the Parole Authority cannot make a parole order unless it is satisfied that the offender has cooperated satisfactorily in police investigations or other actions to identify the victim’s location.”
Similar laws have been introduced in the Northern Territory, Queensland, South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia.
While intended to provide a sense of closure for the family and friends of victims, critics argue that the legislation has serious repercussions for people who are wrongfully convicted. In late 2024, the Bridge of Hope Innocence Project wrote an open letter to the NSW Attorney General, signed by over 100 people, arguing that the law doesn’t effectively incentivise cooperation but instead traps wrongfully convicted individuals in prison, even if they pose minimal risk to society. One high profile example is Lindy Chamberlain-Creighton, who served three years in prison for the murder of her daughter, Azaria. Chamberlain-Creighton was later pardoned when new evidence was found indicating she was innocent.
Following the “no body no parole” amendment, the State Parole Authority is required to have regard to the written advice of NSW Police about the offender’s level of cooperation and assistance concerning the location of the victim.
This includes an evaluation of the timeliness of the offender’s cooperation; the truthfulness, completeness and reliability of information or evidence provided and the significance and usefulness of the offender’s cooperation.
Therefore, the Parole Authority cannot make a parole order unless it is satisfied that the offender has cooperated satisfactorily in police investigations or other actions to identify the victim’s location.”
Similar laws have been introduced in the Northern Territory, Queensland, South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia.
While intended to provide a sense of closure for the family and friends of victims, critics argue that the legislation has serious repercussions for people who are wrongfully convicted. In late 2024, the Bridge of Hope Innocence Project wrote an open letter to the NSW Attorney General, signed by over 100 people, arguing that the law doesn’t effectively incentivise cooperation but instead traps wrongfully convicted individuals in prison, even if they pose minimal risk to society. One high profile example is Lindy Chamberlain-Creighton, who served three years in prison for the murder of her daughter, Azaria. Chamberlain-Creighton was later pardoned when new evidence was found indicating she was innocent.
The concern for those who are subjected to government decisions is that they often do not get to see the integrity of the information which was considered by the decision-maker and don’t get to check if it’s correct.
All parole orders must have conditions setting out what you are required to do and what you must not do while on parole.
On 1 April 2026, the Australian Parliament passed new laws which will change the way Commonwealth parole works.
The criminal justice system deals with proof, not truth. The police and Crown present allegations; the defence rebuts them; the jury decides whether the Crown has met the required standard of proof. “Truth” and “innocence” are not part of the legal equation.
If you have been the victim of a crime, you may be able to apply for financial assistance through a government-run victim compensation scheme.
The law, like other professions, has its own language. It helps keep all the lawyers huddled around some special stuff and keep the rest of us outside.
On 1 April 2026, the Australian Parliament passed new laws which will change the way Commonwealth parole works.
People in prison can apply to transfer from a prison in one state or territory to another, generally for welfare reasons to be closer to family, community supports, or rehabilitation opportunities.