Citation: R v Valentino; R v Subekti [2026] NSWDC 231
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 10 July 2026
Judge(s): Noman SC DCJ
Background
Two offenders were sentenced following guilty pleas to serious Commonwealth offences involving the trafficking and sexual exploitation of a 17-year-old Indonesian national, referred to in the judgment as Yuniarti. The offences occurred between approximately January and March 2024, ending when the Australian Federal Police executed a search warrant at residential premises in Banksia, Sydney.
The first offender, Surya Subekti, is an Australian citizen of Indonesian origin. He operated an ongoing business of recruiting women in Indonesia and facilitating their entry into Australia to perform sex work at Sydney brothels for his financial benefit. He was known to associates by the name "Batman." His conduct with respect to Yuniarti included organising her entry into Australia using fraudulent visa documents, and then subjecting her to forced labour performing sexual services for 10 to 12 hours per day, with her income withheld and her independence tightly controlled.
The second offender, Elton Valentino, is an Indonesian national who entered Australia in 2012 on a student visa and was on a bridging protection visa at the time of his arrest. Subekti employed Valentino as a driver. His role included transporting Yuniarti and other women between the Banksia property and the brothels where they performed sex work, with the knowledge that Yuniarti was under 18 and was to be used to provide sexual services.
Legal Issues
- What sentence was appropriate for Subekti on one count of organising or facilitating the entry of a person under 18 into Australia intending she be used to provide sexual services, contrary to s 271.4(1)(c)(i) of the Criminal Code (Cth) (maximum: 25 years)?
- What sentence was appropriate for Subekti on one count of engaging in conduct causing a person under 18 to enter into or remain in forced labour, contrary to s 270.6A(1) of the Criminal Code (Cth) (maximum: 12 years)?
- What sentence was appropriate for Valentino on one count of facilitating transport of a person under 18 intending she be used to provide sexual services, contrary to s 271.7(c)(i) of the Criminal Code (Cth) (maximum: 25 years)?
- What discount, if any, was warranted for the guilty pleas entered after arraignment but before the trial date?
- What Registrable Persons Orders should be imposed on each offender under the child protection regime?
Decision
Guilty plea discount: The parties agreed, and the court accepted, that the timing of the guilty pleas after arraignment but before the trial date warranted a 10% reduction in sentence for each offender. The court noted the objective utilitarian benefit in avoiding a trial and sparing witnesses from giving evidence, finding the reduction appropriate even though it is not mandated by legislation.
Valentino's sentence: The court sentenced Valentino to a term of imprisonment, with a recognizance release order allowing him to be released after serving 1 year and 10 months on entering into a recognizance of $100 to be of good behaviour for five years. The release date under the recognizance is 28 August 2026, with the term expiring 28 June 2027. The recognizance is conditioned on accepting the supervision and guidance of Community Corrections.
Subekti's sentence: The court imposed an aggregate sentence of 6 years and 5 months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 4 years and 5 months, dating from 26 June 2026. The indicative sentences, after the plea discount, were 5 years and 11 months for the child trafficking offence and 3 years and 7 months for the forced labour offence. The earliest release date is 25 November 2030 and the sentence expires on 25 June 2032. The court took into account the gravity of the conduct, including Subekti's central organising role, the use of fraudulent documentation, the systematic financial control exerted over Yuniarti, and the fact that his offending formed part of an ongoing criminal enterprise.
Registrable Persons Orders: Both offenders were ordered to be recorded on the NSW Child Protection Register, subject to numerous restrictions on their conduct. Subekti, facing two separate charges, was placed on the Register for 15 years. The court declined defence submissions that the lesser period of 8 years was appropriate. Valentino was placed on the Register for 8 years. Reporting obligations for both offenders commence on release from custody, and non-compliance is punishable by up to 5 years imprisonment and a fine of $50,000.
Orders Made
Valentino:
- Released from prison after serving 1 year and 10 months on a recognizance of $100 to be of good behaviour for 5 years
- Recognizance release date: 28 August 2026; term expires 28 June 2027
- Recognizance conditioned on accepting supervision and guidance of Community Corrections
- Recorded on the NSW Child Protection Register for 8 years (commencing on release)
Subekti:
- Convicted on both offences
- Aggregate sentence of 6 years and 5 months imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 4 years and 5 months, commencing 26 June 2026
- Indicative sentence for facilitating entry of a child to provide sexual services: 5 years and 11 months
- Indicative sentence for forced labour of a child: 3 years and 7 months
- Earliest release date: 25 November 2030; sentence expires 25 June 2032
- Recorded on the NSW Child Protection Register for 15 years (commencing on release)
Key Takeaways
- A guilty plea entered after arraignment but before the trial date attracted a 10% sentence reduction in this matter, reflecting the utilitarian benefit of avoiding trial and sparing witnesses, even without a legislative mandate for that specific discount.
- The District Court treated Subekti's central organising role in a structured, ongoing trafficking operation as significantly aggravating, distinguishing his culpability from that of Valentino, whose role was confined to driving and fund transfers.
- Where an offender faces two separate charges under the child protection registration scheme, the court retains a discretion to treat the conduct as part of the same offending and impose the shorter registration period; here, the court declined to exercise that discretion and imposed the maximum 15-year registration period for Subekti.
- Fraudulent visa documentation, systematic financial control over a victim's income, and the commercial profit motive were all prominent features of the facts accepted on sentencing for the trafficking and forced labour counts.
- Child protection registration obligations, including reporting requirements, compliance checks, and travel conditions, commence upon release from custody, and breach carries a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment and a $50,000 fine.
Legislation and Cases Referenced
Legislation:
- Criminal Code (Cth), ss 270.6A(1), 270.8(1)(a), 270.11, 271.4(1)(c)(i), 271.7(c)(i)
- Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), s 16A
Cases:
- Bell v R [2019] NSWCCA 251
- Smith v R [2022] NSWCCA 88
- Wakeling v R [2016] NSWCCA 33