yeah but like no lol
There are definitely circumstances in which someone can be unaware of their HIV status and then potentially infect another person, thereafter that same person could sue/press charges on those grounds even though they didn't knowingly deceive that party. At the very least, the law should be amended to include language which includes deception by the HIV+ individual.
if you are unaware of your HIV status, such as if you are stage 1 or 2 and are therefore asymptomatic, or you have no reason to think you have contracted HIV (you had sex with someone who did not inform you, say) you cannot be held liable (criminal or civil) for transmitting the infection to another person. there's no guilty mind (intent to transmit, or wilful ignorance etc) and therefore no crime. in this regard no criminal or civil charges can be made, and as always, the onus of proof is always on the prosecution.
if you have a guilty mind, it's a different story. unfortunately there isn't much of a substantive base to go on regarding transmission of HIV - there has been only one criminal trial in NSW,(
Kanengele-Yondjo v Regina (NSW, 2006) so as of yet you may or may not be guilty of murder or manslaughter through transmission.
the law should not be amended to include any HIV-specific language. this is, in fact, the
opposite of how the law has developed. all HIV-specific language and law has, over time, been amended, due it being highly discriminatory and stigmatising of the disease and its sufferers. an example of the discriminatory nature of such laws is evident in
R vs Barry (QLD, 1989), where an HIV+ aboriginal man who smeared feces on a police officer's face was found guilty of the wilful exposure of another to a grievous bodily disease (a law pretty much made for HIV). i believe all states/territories have repealed willful exposure as a criminal offence and language specific to HIV. the crime is
transmitting the infection and is covered under the general offence of grievous bodily harm (this is the international standard, endorsed by UNAIDS). while it is a tragic and unique disease, there is no reason for any special mention of HIV under law. the article linked by townie is misleading because in NSW, you must inform a sexual partner about having
any STI, not just HIV.
the NSW law townie refers to is not enforced and would likely collapse under a serious challenge because it arguably contravenes the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (signed and ratified by Australia, 1980) and the Commonwealth Human Rights (Sexual Conduct) Act, 1994, where sexual conduct involving consenting adults acting in private is not subject to any arbitrary political interference with privacy.
