|
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Introduction
1.1
On 2 September 2008, the Senate referred the Independent Reviewer of
Terrorism Laws Bill 2008 [No. 2] (Bill) to the Standing Committee on Legal and
Constitutional Affairs, for inquiry and report by 24 September 2008. On 22 September 2008, the Senate agreed to extend the reporting date until 14 October 2008.
1.2
The Bill, a private Senators' bill co-sponsored by Senators Judith Troeth
and Gary Humphries, was introduced into the Senate on 23 June 2008. The Bill seeks to establish an 'Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Laws' (Independent
Reviewer) to ensure ongoing and integrated review of the operation,
effectiveness and implications of laws in Australia relating to terrorism.
1.3
In summary, the Bill sets out:
- the functions of the Independent Reviewer, the process for
conducting a review, and reporting requirements; and
- the terms and conditions of appointment of the Independent
Reviewer, the basis for termination of appointment, and requirements in respect
of the disclosure of interests that the Independent Reviewer has or acquires.
Background
1.4
The Bill is identical to the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Laws Bill
2008 which was introduced into the House of Representatives by Mr Petro
Georgiou MP on 17 March 2008. Mr Georgiou has been a vocal proponent of continuous
independent review of Australia's counter-terrorism laws.[1]
In her Second Reading Speech, Senator Troeth expressed her indebtedness to Mr Georgiou
for providing her with 'much of the detailed information' for that speech.[2]
1.5
Senator Troeth explained the rationale for the Bill as follows:
Some have expressed views that aspects of the current regime are
draconian. Obviously, our response to the threat of terrorism cannot simply be
more and more stringent laws, more police and more intelligence personnel.
Rather, we need to provide adequate safeguards to ensure scrutiny,
accountability and transparency. This point was made by the European
Commissioner for Justice, Freedom and Security, Mr Franco Frattini in speech to
the EU Conference on Public Security, Privacy and Technology on 20 November 2007.
The challenges of protecting security without undermining
fundamental rights requires constant vigilance. In an effort to address this,
when Parliament passed the Security Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act of
2002, the then Opposition instigated a requirement that the Attorney-General
establish a one-off public and independent review of the operation of a number
of counter terrorism laws.[3]
1.6
This led to the establishment of the Security Legislation Review
Committee (SLRC), chaired by the Hon Simon Sheller AO QC. The SLRC tabled its
report in June 2006. Its first recommendation was that the government should establish
a legislative-based timetable for continuing review of Australia's security
legislation by an independent body:
It is important that the ongoing operation of the provisions,
including the views taken of particular provisions by the courts, be closely
monitored and that Australian governments have an independent source of expert
commentary on the legislation. Either an independent reviewer should be
appointed, or a further review by an independent body such as the SLRC should
be conducted in three years.[4]
1.7
A permanent mechanism for independent review was also examined in detail
and endorsed by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security:[5]
The joint committee's recommendation for a position of an
independent reviewer of terrorism laws to be created was first made in 2006 and
re-iterated in 2007. The former government did not respond to the unanimous and
emphatic recommendation, and so far Attorney-General McClelland has not
commented on the proposal and has simply advised that the Rudd Government is
considering a number of useful recommendations made by the Parliamentary Joint
Committee as well as the Sheller committee and the Australian Law Reform
Commission.[6]
1.8
Senator Troeth informed the Senate that the Bill 'is essential to ensure
the reviewer's independence and to give [the reviewer] the powers needed to do
the job well'. She also stated that it is 'regrettable that the Labor
Government, which had strongly supported the creation of this position when in
Opposition, used its numbers in the House to prevent any discussion of the bill
without giving a reason'.[7]
Conduct of the inquiry
1.9
The committee advertised the inquiry in The Australian newspaper
on 10 September 2008, and invited submissions by 12 September 2008. Details of the inquiry, the Bill, and associated documents were placed on the committee's
website. The committee also wrote to over 30 organisations and individuals.
1.10
The committee received 22 submissions which are listed at Appendix 1.
Submissions were placed on the committee's website for ease of access by the
public.
1.11
The committee held a public hearing in Canberra on 18 September 2008. A list of witnesses who appeared at the hearings is at Appendix 2 and copies of
the Hansard transcript are available through the Internet at http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard.
Acknowledgement
1.12
The committee thanks the organisations and individuals who made
submissions and gave evidence at the public hearing.
Note on references
1.13
References in this report are to individual submissions as received by
the committee, not to a bound volume. References to the committee Hansard are
to the proof Hansard: page numbers may vary between the proof and the official
Hansard transcript.
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page
Website feedback: web.senate@aph.gov.au
Last reviewed 14 October 2008 by the Senate Web Administrator
© Commonwealth of Australia
Parliament of Australia Web Site Privacy Statement
Images courtesy of AUSPIC
|
