See, eg, Security Legislation Review Committee (‘SLRC’), Report of the Security Legislation Review Committee (2006), [10.93], [10.95]–[10.97]; Australian Law Reform Commission (‘ALRC’), “Fighting Words': A Review of Sedition Laws in Australia (2006), [7.36], [7.40]–[7.46]; Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (‘PJCIS’), Review of Security and Counter-Terrorism Laws (2006), [3.5]–[3.6], [3.9], [3.21]; Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, Parliament of Australia, Inquiry into the Terrorist Organisation Listing Provisions of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) (2007), [3.2]–[3.5].
2.
Ibid.
3.
PickeringSharon, Counter-Terrorism Policing and Culturally Diverse Communities (2007), [2.5.15], [7.4], [7.5.2].
4.
Ibid111.
5.
See, eg, SLRC, above n 1, [10.97].
6.
McClellandRobert (Paper presented at Safeguarding Australia 2008, Canberra, 23 July 2008), [33].
7.
SLRC, above n 1, [10.102].
8.
PJCIS (2006), above n 1, [3.32], [3.38], [3.45] (Recommendations 3–5).
9.
PJCIS (2007), above n 1, [3.25] (Recommendation 1).
10.
SLRC, above n 1, [10.99], [10.101]–[10.102]; PJCIS (2006), above n 1, [3.33]– [3.38], Recommendations 4–5; PJCIS (2007), above n 1, [3.24]–[3.25].
11.
SLRC, above n 1, [10.99]–[10.100], [10.102]; PJCIS (2006), above n 1, [3.39]–[3.43]; PJCIS (2007), above n 1, [3.19]–[3.20], [3.25].
12.
PJCIS (2006), above n 1, [3.45] (Recommendation 5).
13.
Though there have certainly been greater efforts made by the Commonwealth towards improving community consultation and education: Australian Government, Submission No 14 to the PJCIS (2006), above n 1, Part II, 2.
14.
The third edition of this publication was launched on 17 July 2008 and is available at <amcran.org/>.
15.
See, eg, Australian Government, Attorney-General's Department, Submission No 31 to the ALRC, above n 1.
See for example Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) s 101.6.
19.
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) s 101.2.
20.
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) ss 101.4, 101.5.
21.
RoseGregoryNestorovskaDiana, ‘Australian counter-terrorism offences: Necessity and clarity in federal criminal law reforms’ (2007) 31Criminal Law Journal20, 28–30; McSherryBernadette, ‘Terrorism Offences in the Criminal Code: Broadening the Boundaries of Australian Criminal Laws’ (2004) 27UNSW Law Journal354, 366–67.
22.
See for example Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) s 101.2
23.
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) s 102.1(1) (definition of a “terrorist organisation’).
24.
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) s 102.1(1). See also s 102.1(2).
25.
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), s 102.1(1A) (definition of “advocates').
26.
See, eg, Australian Muslim Civil Rights Advocacy Network, Submission No 22 to the PJCIS (2007), above n 1.
27.
Criminal Code Regulations 2002 (Cth) cll 4A–4W. The GIA was not relisted when it expired in November 2008. For an overview of proscription in other countries, see DouglasRoger, ‘Proscribing terrorist organisations: Legislation and practice in five English-speaking democracies’ (2008) 32Criminal Law Journal90, 96.
28.
Public Interest Advocacy Centre, Submission No 11 to the PJCIS (2007), above n 1, 5.
29.
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), s 102.2.
30.
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), s 102.4.
31.
PJCIS (2007), above n 1, [3.17]–[3.18].
32.
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), s 102.6. The Charter of the United Nations Act 1995 (Cth) also makes it a criminal offence for a person to deal with the assets of a person or entity listed under that Act or to give assets to a listed person or entity (ss 20–21).
33.
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), s 102.6(2)(c).
34.
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), s 5.4.
35.
AlyWaleed, ‘Reckless terror law threatens charities at home’, Sydney Morning Herald (Sydney), 29 August 2005.
36.
ThamJoo-Cheong, ‘Giving rights away, but to what end?’, The Age (Melbourne), 14 November 2006.
37.
StewartCameronRobinsonNatasha, ‘Tamil Tigers in Tsunami Funds Row’, The Australian (Sydney), 25 November 2005.
38.
Aruran Vinayagamoorthy and Sivarajah Yathavan (along with Arumugam Rajeevan of Sydney) were granted bail in July 2007 and are due to be tried under the financing offences in 2009.
39.
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), ss 102.3 and 102.8 respectively.
40.
Islamic Information and Support Centre of Australia (IISCA) Inc, Submission No 27 to the PJCIS (2007), above n 1, Appendix A.
41.
A broad definition of an “organisation’ was stressed by the Crown in its submissions to the court in R v Ul Haque (unreported, NSW Supreme Court, Bell J, 8 February 2006), [51].
42.
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) s 102.1(1).
43.
SLRC, above n 1, [10.13]; see generally SloanStephen, ‘Foreword: Responding to the Threat’ in BunkerRobert J (ed), Networks, Terrorism and Global Insurgency (2005) xx, xxiv–xxv.
44.
The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security recommended that Australia should change the membership offence to a participation offence similar to that which exists in New Zealand: PJCIS (2006), above n 1, Recommendation 15.
45.
Terrorism Act 2000 (UK), s 11.
46.
PJCIS (2006), above n 1, [5.72].
47.
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), s 102.3(2).
48.
This has been suggested by Amnesty International Australia, Submission No 13 to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee, Inquiry into the Anti-Terrorism Bill 2004 (2004), 9–10. This question remains unanswered.
49.
Ibid.
50.
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), ss 102.8(1), 102.8(2).
51.
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), s 102.8(4).
52.
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), s 102.8(6).
53.
SLRC, above n 1, [10.67]–[10.68].
54.
Ibid [10.64]–[10.65].
55.
Ibid [10.67], [10.71], [10.75].
56.
Ibid [10.66], [10.69].
57.
Ibid [10.77]. As an alternative, the SLRC recommended at [10.78] that s 102.8(5) be repealed.
58.
PJCIS (2006), above n 1, [5.96]. The PJCIS recommended that the offence be “re-examined’ in light of these considerations: [5.99], Recommendation 19.
59.
The advice provided to the former Minister for Immigration and Citizenship by the Solicitor-General and the Minister's decision to revoke Haneef's visa: smh.com.au/pdf/haneefpdf.pdf at 13 August 2008.
McClellandRobert (Paper presented at Security in Government Conference, National Convention Centre, Canberra, 7 December 2007).
62.
Ibid.
63.
McClelland, above n 60.
64.
Australian Muslim Civil Rights Advocacy Network, Submission to the Clarke Inquiry into the case of Dr Mohamed Haneef (2008), 1–2.
65.
Hansard, 19 March 2008, 2199–2202. See also House of Representatives, House Notice Paper, Winter (2008), No 33, 26 June 2008, Orders of the Day, Item 6.
66.
Senator George Brandis, Press Release, ‘Haneef Inquiry must include British Intelligence’, 10 April 2008. See also BlenkinMax, ‘Promise made to the UK about scope of Haneef inquiry’, The Age (Melbourne), 28 May 2008.
67.
Additionally, the powers of the inquiry were criticised as (a) insufficient to compel the production of documents and the appearance of witnesses; and (b) enabling closed proceedings with limitations on the ability of interested persons to attend or cross-examine witnesses.
68.
‘Anti-terror laws need overseer: Liberals’, The Age (Melbourne), 24 June 2008.
69.
NekvapilEmrys, Submission No 45 to the ALRC, above n 1.
70.
See EmertonPatrick, Submission No 108 to the ALRC, above n 1.
