Anti-terrorism Laws in Australia

Australia has played a leading role in the worldwide development of laws to combat
terrorism. The Australian Government has introduced an extensive legislation around
counter-terrorism, national security and other offences. The Crimes Act 1914 covered
a number of offences; however with the events of the past few years, particularly the
September 11 attacks, new laws have been enacted to ensure that Australia and all
Australians are safe from threat.

Counter-terrorism is the practices, tactics, techniques, and strategies that

governments, militaries, police departments and corporations adopt to prevent or in
response to terrorist threats and/or acts, both real and imputed. Counter-terrorism
includes both the detection and action towards potential and current threats.

On September 8 2005, former Prime Minister John Howard introduced a number of

changes to Australia’s counter-terrorism laws with the aim of enabling Australia to
‘better deter, prevent, detect and prosecute acts of terrorism’. Drawing on overseas
experience, particularly the London bombings in July 2005, the Prime Minister
declared that the changes ‘will ensure Australia’s counter-terrorism legislative regime
remains at the forefront of international efforts to counter the global threat of
terrorism’.

Any doubt that the impact of war has had an effect on counter terrorism laws can be
dissolved by looking at the numerous counter terrorism laws enacted since the 2001
terror attacks. In recent years, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation
(ASIO) has actually been granted power to detain people for a limited amount of time,
without trial, if they are considered a threat. Before the September 11 attacks, these
laws would be regarded as unthinkable.

Of the many counter terrorism laws currently in place, the most significant to
Australian National security are:
a) The Anti-Terrorism Act (No. 2) 2005 amends and updates the offence of
sedition.

b) The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Legislation

Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2003 allows the ASIO to detain and question a
person who may have information regarding terrorist activity.

c) The Criminal Code Amendment (Offences Against Australians) Act

2002 makes it an offence to murder, commit manslaughter or
cause serious harm to any Australian, outside of Australia.

d) The Criminal Code Amendment (Suppression of Terrorist Bombings)

Act 2002 makes the act of placing bombs or other lethal devices
in places with the intention of causing death, harm or destruction an offence.
 e) The Security Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2002

f) The Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism Act 2002 targets persons

who provide or collect funds to facilitate a terrorist act.

g) The Telecommunications Interception Legislation Amendment Act

2002 permits law enforcement agencies to seek telecommunications
interception warrants in connection with their investigation of
terrorism offences.

h) The Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2003 (Constitutional

Reference of Power) seeks to remove any uncertainty regarding the
constitutional status of the counter-terrorism legislation.

i) The National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings)

Act 2004 seeks to protect information from disclosure in federal
criminal proceedings where the disclosure would be likely to
prejudice Australia's national security.

One of the most significant additions to Australia’s counter terrorism legislation

involves the ability to be able to charge an individual or group of acts of terrorism for
not just a series of offences, but singularly too.
Therefore it is an offence to commit such an act, practice for it, possess things
connected with it, plan to facilitate it or plan to commit for such an act. Similarly,
there are offences for those who direct, participate in, facilitate and aid the activities
of a terrorist organisation, are knowingly members of, recruit for, raise funds for or
provide support to such organisations.

To define an act of terrorism, the offence must come under the following 4 parts (used
to describe a terrorist act), as cited by
http://www.securitychallenges.org.au/ArticlePDFs/vol3no3Renwick.pdf:

a) First, there has to have been an act, or series of acts which intentionally
cause death, serious harm, damage to property, risk to health and safety;

b) Secondly, the action must not comprise of advocacy, protest, dissent or

industrial action;

c) Thirdly and most importantly as this step distinguishes between an act of

terrorism and general offences like murder, the act must be done “with the
intention of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause”;

d) Lastly, it must be done with the intention of coercing or influencing

by intimidation, the government or a mass section of the public.
There was much opposition from commentators to these new offences and concepts,
mainly upon the grounds that the threats to Australia did not justify the new laws, and
that, in any event, existing criminal laws were sufficient to deal with all conduct so
prescribed.7 Although those arguments did not prevail, it is useful to record why the
new laws were justifiable, by reference to the threats, relevant international law and
the adequacy and appropriateness of existing laws.

Prevention of Terrorism

Perhaps the two most controversial new laws are the laws which permit ASIO to
question (and if necessary torture, to detain) persons orders and detain them without
trial.
The ASIO

Since 9/11 the expansion of the ASIO has rapidly increased.