find the latest legal job
Corporate Counsel and Company Secretary
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: Newcastle, Maitland & Hunter NSW
· Highly-respected, innovative and entrepreneurial Not-for-Profit · Competency based Board
View details
Chief Counsel and Company Secretary
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: Newcastle, Maitland & Hunter NSW
· Dynamic, high growth organisation · ASX listed market leader
View details
In-house Projects Lawyer | Renewables / Solar | 2-5 Years PQE
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: All Australia
· Help design the future · NASDAQ Listed
View details
Corporate Lawyer
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: Melbourne CBD & Inner Suburbs Melbourne VIC
· 12 months fixed term opportunity
View details
Property lawyer - Melbourne
Category: Property Law | Location: Melbourne CBD & Inner Suburbs Melbourne VIC
· Impressive client list, national firm · Well-led and high-performing team
View details
Terror debate not about rights versus legislation: Roxon

Terror debate not about rights versus legislation: Roxon

DEBATE ABOUT anti terror laws should not be portrayed as a battle between those who fight terrorism and those who defend civil liberties, the federal Shadow Attorney-General said last week.…

DEBATE ABOUT anti terror laws should not be portrayed as a battle between those who fight terrorism and those who defend civil liberties, the federal Shadow Attorney-General said last week.

“We can’t and shouldn’t do one without the other,” Nicola Roxon said in a speech on the Anti-Terrorism Bill (Number 2) 2005. In its unexpected backing of recent federal Government moves, Labor is supporting the need to give authorities some increased powers.

“These include, regrettably, powers to control and detain people who may not have yet committed a crime, but who are on the cusp of committing crimes of unspeakable horror,” she said.

While it would be preferable not to give the police these powers, she said, “if circumstances do force you to, then our job is to look at what is needed to tightly limit the use of these powers and the strong safeguards that must be put in place to make sure they are not misused”.

The terrorist threat does require “tough new laws”, said Roxon, “but [Labor] demands that their use be circumscribed carefully”. The Opposition is critical of the “starting point” of the Howard Government, she said, “at first failing to give any serious attention to the need to put in place strong safeguards”.

But there are aspects of the Bill that Labor does support, Roxon continued, some of which the party has advocated for some time. For example, “the Bill implements the Leader of the Opposition’s idea to introduce a uniform national regime for emergency stop and search powers, an important step that will help federal and state police co-operate where the battle against terrorism counts the most — on the ground”.

As well, the use of closed circuit television and “some parts of confronting the issue of terrorist financing” are both supported by Labor.

It is important that the law be modified specifically to suit the terrorist threat, said Roxon, arguing that the nature of terrorism demanded a new method of law enforcement, which relied on new legal tools. “The most controversial aspects of the Bill concern preventative detention and control orders. Both of these proposed regimes involve serious restrictions on the free movement of terrorist suspects. Under our normal system of law, restrictions such as these — especially those involving detention — would not be acceptable in the absence of a criminal prosecution.

“The proposed regimes are a critical conceptual departure from regular criminal law: they focus on future events not past conduct. Naturally, it is a departure anyone would prefer to avoid because it unsettles many of the principles of criminal justice that underpin our free society. But terrorism is a crime that challenges many of the assumptions that our criminal justice system rests on. The traditional emphasis on punishment and deterrent has no effect on those prepared to die in the act of killing. And because terrorists plan crimes that kill and injure on a vast scale, our police need the tools to catch terrorists before they bring their crimes to fruition.

“This is an entirely new emphasis for law enforcement, and it demands new legal tools, including the option of control orders and short-term preventative detention where these can prevent imminent terrorist attacks,” said Roxon.

But, while terrorism may demand “some departures from our traditions”, it is not an excuse for “junking them wholesale”, she said.

The Labor Party also has some significant concerns about aspects of the Bill, she said. “Labor wants the Government to allow the parliamentary process to go through the legislation with a fine tooth comb, to press for better safeguards and iron out other problems in the Bill.”

“The Government has resisted this at every step — the secrecy around early drafts, the plan to rush through debate on Cup Day and the idea of a one day senate inquiry. Piece by piece, Labor and the community have forced the Government to take just a little more time.”

As well, Labor sees problems with the proposal to give retrospective effect to the Anti-Terrorism Bill as well as the “unreasonable restrictions” on communications between detainees and families.

“The breadth and reach of the provisions relating to the advocacy and financing of terrorism” also worried the Opposition, as do “any remaining question marks over the Bill’s compliance with our Constitution and international law”.

It is essential that these matters are dealt with appropriately, she said. “Our fight against terror will not be well served by poorly drafted and ill-considered legislation. We have not been permitted sufficient time to debate these issues in the House. But, I hope at least that the Government will be open minded about recommendations that come through the Senate Committee process.”

Like this story? Read more:

QLS condemns actions of disgraced lawyer as ‘stain on the profession’

NSW proposes big justice reforms to target risk of reoffending

The legal budget breakdown 2017

Terror debate not about rights versus legislation: Roxon
lawyersweekly logo
Promoted content
Recommended by Spike Native Network
more from lawyers weekly
Warning
Aug 23 2017
NT Law Society sounds alarm on mandatory sentencing
The Law Society Northern Territory has issued a warning over mandatory sentencing, saying it hasn’...
Unite
Aug 22 2017
Professionals unite in support of marriage equality
The presidents of representative bodies for solicitors, barristers and doctors in NSW have come toge...
Aug 21 2017
Is your firm on the right track for gig economy gains?
Promoted by The way we do business, where we work, how we engage with workers, even how we take a...
APPOINTMENTS
Allens managing partner Richard Spurio, image courtesy Allens' website
Jun 21 2017
Promo season at Allens
A group of lawyers at Allens have received promotions across its PNG and Australian offices. ...
May 11 2017
Partner exits for in-house role
A Victorian lawyer has left the partnership of a national firm to start a new gig with state governm...
Esteban Gomez
May 11 2017
National firm recruits ‘major asset’
A national law firm has announced it has appointed a new corporate partner who brings over 15 years'...
opinion
Nicole Rich
May 16 2017
Access to justice for young transgender Australians
Reform is looming for the process that young transgender Australians and their families must current...
Geoff Roberson
May 11 2017
The lighter side of the law: when law and comedy collide
On the face of it, there doesn’t seem to be much that is amusing about the law, writes Geoff Rober...
Help
May 10 2017
Advocate’s immunity – without fear or without favour but not both
On 29 March 2017, the High Court handed down its decision in David Kendirjian v Eugene Lepore & ...