The ACT DPP issues a response to an exclusive article we published last week “ We don't do that in this country': judge slams DPP" by Andrew Fraser.

MEDIA STATEMENT

ACT Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions

7 November 2025

DPP v HOJLUND (NO. 2)

Trigger warning: This media statement links to information about a sexual assault matter that some readers may find distressing.

The ACT Office of the Director of Public Prosecution (ACT DPP) respects the Court’s decision making and the Court’s entitlement to robust interaction with practitioners in dealing with serious matters.

The matter is the subject of recent commentary related to DPP v Hojlund (No 2) – ACT Supreme Court, the facts of which are set out in the Court’s original sentencing judgment. An appeal was brought on the sole ground the sentences imposed were “manifestly inadequate”.

Appeals are brought in accordance with the director’s statutory responsibility to ensure sentences reflect the gravity of offending and are in line with community values and expectations. Appeals are an important way in which checks and balances are maintained in the criminal justice system.

Our role is to act independently, impartially and in the public interest – without fear or favour. That principle continues to guide every decision made by the ACT DPP.

The views expressed in this article may or may not reflect those of Pearls and Irritations.