|
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page
Chapter 3 - Annual reports on the operation of Acts & Programs
3.1
Standing Order 25(20) does not provide for consideration of reports on
the implementation or operation of Acts or programs. The committee is not
therefore required to include them in its report on the examination of annual
reports. However, the committee chose on this occasion to examine in some
detail the following reports:
- Report to the Attorney-General on the results of inspections of
records under s 55 of the Surveillance Devices Act 2004 (published by the
Commonwealth Ombudsman);
- Protection visa processing taking more than 90 days for the reporting
period 1 March 2007 to 30 June 2007 (published by DIAC); and
- Report pursuant to Section 440a of the Migration Act on the conduct
of Refugee Review Tribunal Reviews not completed within 90 days for the period 1 March 2007 to 30 June 2007 (published by the Refugee Review Tribunal).
Report under the Surveillance Devices Act 2004
3.2
The Surveillance Devices Act 2004 (the Act) regulates the use of
surveillance devices by law enforcement agencies.[1]
Subsection 55(1) of the Act requires the Ombudsman to inspect the records of
each law enforcement agency to determine the extent of compliance with the Act
by the agency and its law enforcement officers.[2]
Privacy Issues
3.3
The Ombudsman highlighted several issues in relation to compliance with s
16(2)(c) of the Act.[3]
Section 16(2)(c) states that in determining whether to issue a surveillance
device warrant, the issuing officer must have regard to the extent to which the
privacy of any person is likely to be affected.[4]
In relation to AFP compliance with this section of the Act the Ombudsman found
that:
A number of files inspected did not comment on the effect on
privacy in the application or supporting affidavit. While some affidavits noted
the issue of privacy, most did not adequately address the requirement of
s16(2)(c), which would appear to require an assessment as to the degree privacy
will be affected, taking into account the particular circumstances. This issue
has been raised in previous reports to the agency.[5]
3.4
The committee has previously noted the Ombudsman's concerns relating to AFP
compliance with paragraph 16(2)(c) of the Act[6]
and is disappointed to see that the Ombudsman has had to raise these issues again.
The committee encourages the AFP to examine why these problems have occurred
and take appropriate corrective action.
Protection visa processing and reviews taking more than 90 days
3.5
Under section 91Y of the Migration Act the Department of Immigration and
Citizenship (the Department) is required to report on protection visa
applications which take more than 90 days to process. Similarly, section 440A
requires the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) to report on reviews not completed
within 90 days. The Department and the RRT are required to report every four
months with the latest reporting period being 1 March 2007 to 30 June 2007. In this report, the committee has considered the outcomes reported in the three
previous reporting periods.
Protection Visa processing taking
more than 90 days
3.6
The table below compares protection visa processing by DIAC taking more
than 90 days for the three previous reporting periods:
|
|
1 July 2006 to 31 October 2006
|
1 November 2006 to 28 February 2007
|
1 March 2007 to 30 June 2007
|
|
Total number undecided
outside of 90 day period
|
288
|
325
|
373
|
|
Total number decided
outside of 90 day period
|
344
|
284
|
503
|
|
Total number processed
outside of 90 day period
|
632
|
609
|
876
|
|
Percentage of total
applications processed outside of 90 day period
|
21%
|
18.5%
|
27.6%
|
3.7
The committee notes that there has been an increase in the number of
protection visas processed outside of 90 days. However, the committee also
notes that this is largely due to factors outside DIAC's control.[7]
Refugee Review Tribunal reviews not
completed within 90 days
3.8
This table outlines RRT reviews not completed within 90 days, compared
with reviews completed within 90 days, for the previous three reporting
periods:
|
|
1 July 2006 to 31 October 2006
|
1 November 2006 to 28 February 2007
|
1 March 2007 to 30 June 2007
|
|
Reviews completed outside of 90 days
|
275(24%)
|
243(22%)
|
177(22%)
|
|
Reviews completed within 90 days
|
891(76%)
|
873(78%)
|
642(78%)
|
|
Total
|
1166
|
1116
|
819
|
3.9
The committee is pleased to note that the number of reviews not
completed within 90 days continues to decline.
Senator Trish
Crossin
Committee Chair
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page

Comments to: web.senate@aph.gov.au
Last reviewed 31 March 2008 by the Senate Web Administrator
© Commonwealth of Australia
Parliament of Australia Web Site Privacy Statement
Images courtesy of AUSPIC
|