Powers to ban violent offenders from some of Perth’s busiest night spots have helped improve public perception of safety in those areas.
However, the state’s ombudsman also found they were “error-ridden” and have disproportionately targeted Aboriginal people and the homeless.
WA Ombudsman Bevan Warner’s first probe into WA’s Protected Entertainment Precinct laws has found information blockages between WA Police and the law’s lead agency – Racing, Gaming and Liquor – had resulted in some serious offenders not being served their bans.
He also found fears held before the laws passed in 2022 by groups like Aboriginal Legal Service WA that the bans, known as exclusion orders, would be heavily skewed toward vulnerable groups had been realised.
What are PEPs?
The PEP laws were passed following an unprovoked one-punch attack which killed Giuseppe Raco in Northbridge in July 2020.
Precincts the laws apply to include nightlife areas including Perth, Northbridge, Fremantle, Hillarys, Mandurah and Scarborough.
The powers give police and the Director of Liquor Licensing the power to ban people committing violent acts in a PEP for as little as a day to six months for short-term exclusion orders, or to up to five years for adults and two years for juveniles for automatic and extended orders.
‘Error-prone’ methods at heart of problems
Warner found there were violent offenders who should have been given automatic exclusion orders, but weren’t, because of Racing, Gaming and Liquor’s “error-prone” method of identifying them.
He said staff did not have access to police systems and had to manually gather information through exchanges with police or by checking publicly available court records.
“Our monitoring also found several individuals who appear to meet the legal threshold to be automatically excluded but who had not been flagged by RGL at the end of the monitoring period,” he said.
Warner also found six instances where Racing, Gaming and Liquor incorrectly notified people as automatic excluded offenders despite them not meeting legal criteria.
“These errors are problematic because automatic excluded offenders are denied the right to seek a review of their status, and their freedom of movement was wrongly limited,” he said.
“The rate of omission and misclassification suggests a systemic problem rather than isolated errors and we cannot be confident that all automatic excluded offenders were excluded, when they should have been.”
On short-term notices, Warner said they found instances where they were issued despite not meeting the threshold and instances where police guidelines were not applied appropriate, including when individual circumstances were ignored.
Warner said he found six instances of short-term orders being issued for conduct outside a PEP area which results in five of them being quickly revoked.
“Any new scheme will have teething problems, but it is important these weaknesses are fixed,” Warner said.
Aboriginal people and the homeless subject to more bans
Warner’s probe showed the fears held by groups including the Aboriginal Legal Service back in 2022 that vulnerable groups would be subjected to bans more frequently had come to fruition.
The PEP laws were applied disproportionately to Aboriginal people, who were the recipients of 41.6 per cent of short-term exclusion orders, despite representing 3.3 per cent of the population.
“Aboriginal people informed us that the scheme also compounds prior trauma, making them feel less safe which further undermines their trust in public institutions,” Warner said.
Homeless people made up 20 per cent of all approved short-term exclusion orders.
Warner cited a survey of 1000 people which found more people said they felt “safer” rather than “less safe” in PEP areas (25 per cent compared to 16 per cent), and more people said the areas felt “more welcoming” than “less welcoming” (41.9 per cent compared to 13.5 per cent).
He also cited police stats that showed a lower growth of reported offences in PEP areas but said this data was “inconclusive” and may not be entirely attributable to the PEP laws.
“While it is good that some people feel safer and more welcome, the available evidence does not show those changes can be attributed solely to the PEP scheme,” Warner said, pointing to other improvements in the precincts like better lighting and CCTV.
A spokesman for the government said the PEP laws have been effective but said the overrepresentation of Aboriginal people and other vulnerable groups was a concern and “warrants careful attention.”
“The Police Minister and the Police Commissioner have spoken about how exclusion orders can be applied consistently, giving consideration to issues raised in the report,” he said.
“The Cook Labor Government will carefully consider the report’s recommendations and work to strengthen the scheme so it remains both effective in improving safety and fair for all Western Australians.”
Automatic exclusion orders apply to anyone who commits a violent offence in a PEP area, like murder, manslaughter, assault, rape, and drink-spiking.
In three years, 47 automatic exclusion orders were issued – 41 of those because of an offence committed in Perth or Northbridge.
WA Police made 737 applications for short-term exclusion orders in the period and 77 per cent were approved by a senior police officer.
The number of short-term orders increased dramatically over the past three years from 137 in 2024 to 365 in 2025 including 190 involving weapons which Warner said was likely attributable to knife-wanding laws which came into effect at the end of 2024.
Warner made seven recommendations including allowing the Director of Liquor Licensing to have access to relevant WA Police information to identify offenders subject to an automatic notice quickly.
He also recommended police should always consider individual circumstances when deciding to seeking a short-term order.
From our partners
Read the full article here














