The Commonwealth Crimes Amendment (Bail and Sentencing) Act 2006 was introduced following significant media attention in 2005-06 which focused on allegations of widespread family violence and child abuse in remote Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory. It amended the Crimes Act 1914 in two main ways. It deleted ‘cultural background’ from the matters that a court is to take into account in sentencing, and it prohibited courts from taking into account ‘any form of customary law or cultural practice’ as a mitigating or aggravating factor in sentencing or in considering bail. The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission was one of a number of groups and individuals who opposed the introduction of the Act, arguing that it, and the process surrounding its introduction, were fundamentally flawed. Significantly, rather than these changes being part of a solution to violence and child abuse, HREOC noted its concern that they may be part of the problem because they undermine a potentially powerful source of Indigenous authority. This article discusses the criticisms made by HREOC of the sentencing provisions of the Bail and Sentencing Act.