Additional comments by the Australian Democrats
1.1
The Democrats agree with the evidence presented in the
Chair's report.
1.2
We share the concerns raised and endorse the
recommendations contained therein.
1.3
We are particularly concerned about the possible use of
foreign evidence that may have been obtained though torture and agree with The
Gilbert and Tobin Centre of Public Law that this would be an "excellent
opportunity for the Commonwealth Parliament to affirm its abhorrence of the use
of torture in the procurement of evidence".[172]
1.4
We also note the views of the Law Society of New South
Wales in relation to part 1D (DNA profiles), that they could not see a
justification for "why DNA that is provided for a specific purpose by a
volunteer should then be made available for investigations of any
offence".[173] Similarly, the
Australian Privacy Foundation also expressed concerns that there may be
"function creep" in relation to the exchange of DNA evidence and
privacy considerations.[174]
1.5
The Australian Privacy Foundation also urged the
committee to look at "how the changes relate to the recommendations of the
ALRC in its 2003 genetic privacy report Essentially Yours, to which the
government has yet to respond".[175]
1.6
The Democrats believe that these issues once again
highlight the need for a comprehensive privacy regime that covers genetic
privacy and discrimination.
1.7
We reserve our judgement on the Bill
contingent with the Committee's recommendations and the resolution of the
matters outlined above.
Senator
Natasha Stott Despoja
Australian Democrats
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page