FREE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY - Online materials, documents

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 14 | 15 || 17 | 18 |   ...   | 49 |

«Fighting Words REPORT A Review of Sedition Laws in Australia REPORT 104 July 2006 © Commonwealth of Australia 2006 This work is copyright. You may ...»

-- [ Page 16 ] --

4.37 Prior to the amendments to Division 102 made by the Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorist Organisations) Act 2004 (Cth), an organisation could be listed as a terrorist organisation only if it already had been formally declared as such by the United Nations Security Council, or if a dedicated piece of legislation had been passed by the Australian Parliament in the relevant case.

4.38 The Australian Government argued that this mechanism was too restrictive and cumbersome to meet Australia’s particular security needs. For example, the Security Council might be slow to act in the case of an organisation that mainly posed a regional, rather than an international, threat; or the Security Council might be influenced by political considerations that are not shared by Australia. As noted above, listing now proceeds through the making of a regulation, and no longer relies on prior Security Council resolutions.

4.39 Before these changes, it could have been argued that there was a need to retain the unlawful associations provisions in the Crimes Act, since the high bar of

–  –  –

identification as a ‘terrorist organisation’ by the Security Council made listing difficult, and therefore left gaps in the law which terrorists could exploit. However, the new listing procedures are not subject to the same constraints.

Sheller Committee

4.40 The Security Legislation Review Committee (the Sheller Committee), chaired by the Hon Simon Sheller AO, conducted a review of the operation and effectiveness of the counter-terrorism laws, including Divisions 101 and 102.53 The review was a statutory requirement of the Security Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2002 (Cth), and concluded in June 2006.54

4.41 The Sheller Committee—which comprised, among others, the Commonwealth Ombudsman, the Human Rights Commissioner and the Privacy Commissioner— looked in detail at the proscription of terrorist organisations and the associated offences. It found that—while to date there was no evidence of excessive or improper use of the provisions—some parts of the Criminal Code should be repealed or changed because of their potential impact on human rights.55

4.42 In particular, the Sheller Committee considered that the process by which an organisation is listed does not allow members of an organisation to know or answer in advance the allegations against the group. Given that, once an organisation is proscribed, its members are liable to serious criminal penalties, the Committee recommended that a fairer and more transparent process should be adopted. Some members of the Committee supported a judicial process (which would be similar to the process under the unlawful association provisions), whereby an application is made to the court. Other members considered that the process should remain an executive one, however, with the Attorney-General being advised about whether an organisation should be proscribed by an independent committee that would conduct public hearings and receive submissions.56

4.43 Other relevant recommendations were that:

• consideration should be given to amending the Code so that proscription is the only method by which an organisation may be declared a terrorist organisation;57 53 Security Legislation Review Committee, Report of the Security Legislation Review Committee (2006).

54 Security Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2002 (Cth) s 4(1).

55 Security Legislation Review Committee, Report of the Security Legislation Review Committee (2006), 4.

For a discussion of the recommendations of the Committee in relation to the treason offences, see Ch 11.

56 Ibid, Recs 3 and 4.

57 Ibid, Rec 10.

96 Fighting Words

• s 102.8, which creates an offence of ‘associating with terrorist organisations’, should be repealed;58 and

• s 102.7 should be amended so that ‘providing support to a terrorist organisation’ cannot be construed in any way to extend to the publication of views that appear to be favourable to the proscribed organisation and its stated objective.59 Submissions and consultations

4.44 In response to Issues Paper 30 (IP 30), a number of submissions shared the view that the terrorist organisation offences rendered the unlawful associations provisions unnecessary. The Australian Federal Police indicated that, in practice, they had not used the unlawful associations provisions, and expressed satisfaction with the framing of the terrorist organisation offences.60 The Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions agreed that the definition of a terrorist organisation was likely to be sufficiently broad to cover effectively the activities of any group that previously would have been considered for designation as an unlawful association.61

4.45 Victoria Legal Aid agreed that there is no longer any need to retain these provisions, ‘given that Division 102 now provides a simple procedure for protecting the safety of Australians—by proscribing terrorist organisations and criminalising specific conduct in relation to those organisations’.62

4.46 The New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties submitted that Part IIA of the Crimes Act now seems redundant given the powers enacted under the anti-terrorism legislation in the Criminal Code in recent years with regard to the proscribing of terrorist organisations.63 This view was shared by a number of other lawyers and commentators with whom the Inquiry consulted.64

4.47 ARTICLE 19 noted that:

While we have a number of concerns with the provisions relating to the proscription of ‘terrorist’ organisations introduced in 2002, we consider that these provisions [need] to be at least more causally linked to proscribing on the basis that an association may pose a threat to national security.

Furthermore, the scope of the unlawful association provisions have been progressively eroded by context-specific legislation which supersedes the latter’s 58 Ibid, Rec 15.

59 Ibid, Rec 14.

60 Australian Federal Police, Consultation, Canberra, 26 April 2006.

61 Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, Consultation, Canberra, 26 April 2006.

62 Victoria Legal Aid, Submission SED 43, 13 April 2006.

63 New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties Inc, Submission SED 39, 10 April 2006.

64 R Connolly and C Connolly, Consultation, Melbourne, 5 April 2006; Human Rights Lawyers, Consultation, Sydney, 29 March 2006; D Neal, Consultation, Melbourne, 4 April 2006; M Weinberg, Consultation, Melbourne, 3 April 2006; B Saul, Submission SED 52, 14 April 2006.

4. Unlawful Associations 97 application, including the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth) and the counterterrorism amendments to the Criminal Code in 2002.65

4.48 The Attorney-General’s Department noted that ‘circumstances have changed dramatically since the enactment of Part IIA. The terrorism provisions address contemporary threats to the Australian community’.66

4.49 In DP 71, the ALRC proposed that the unlawful association provisions should be repealed.67 Significant support was expressed for this proposal,68 and no dissenting or alternative view was expressed to the ALRC.

ALRC’s views

4.50 The ALRC concludes that the unlawful associations provisions are unnecessary and should be repealed. It is difficult to imagine a practical circumstance in which a group advocating the overthrow of the Constitution or the established government does not have an accompanying intention to advance a particular cause or coerce or influence a governmental authority. If such a case should arise, the ALRC agrees with the Gibbs Committee that existing criminal laws covering murder, assault, abduction, damage to property or conspiracy—or incitement to any of the above activities—would be sufficient to deal appropriately with offenders.69

4.51 In Chapter 2, the ALRC recommends that, due to its historical connotations, the term ‘sedition’ should be removed from the federal statute book. There is no sound reason to preserve an anachronistic definition of seditious intention in Part IIA of the Crimes Act.

4.52 Repeal of the unlawful associations provisions will not leave a gap in federal criminal law. Both the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ and a ‘terrorist organisation’ under the Criminal Code are sufficiently broad to cover the types of organisations that advocate or urge politically motivated violence. As outlined above, the Sheller Committee has made a number of recommendations to amend the terrorist organisation provisions of the Criminal Code to allow greater procedural fairness in the listing process and to limit the scope of the offences so it is clear that only persons who 65 ARTICLE 19, Submission SED 14, 10 April 2006.

66 Australian Government Attorney-General’s Department, Submission SED 31, 12 April 2006.

67 Australian Law Reform Commission, Review of Sedition Laws, DP 71 (2006), Proposal 11–1.

68 Support for the proposal was received from Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance, Submission SED 117, 3 July 2006; National Tertiary Education Union, Submission SED 118, 3 July 2006; R Douglas, Submission SED 87, 3 July 2006; Sydney PEN, Submission SED 88, 3 July 2006; Victoria Legal Aid, Submission SED 79, 3 July 2006; Law Institute of Victoria, Submission SED 70, 28 June 2006; Australian Press Council, Submission SED 66, 23 June 2006; Arts Law Centre of Australia, Submission SED 65, 6 June 2006; Public Interest Advocacy Centre, Submission SED 125, 7 July 2006.

69 H Gibbs, R Watson and A Menzies, Review of Commonwealth Criminal Law: Offences Relating to the Security and Defence of the Commonwealth, Discussion Paper No 8 (1988), [10.2].

98 Fighting Words provide actual ‘support’ to an organisation are guilty of an offence.70 Whether or not these recommendations are taken up by the Australian Government, the terrorist organisations provisions are a more modern and appropriate way to deal with organisations that advocate politically motivated violence, rather than the outdated definitions found under Part IIA.

Recommendation 4–1 Sections 30A, 30AA, 30AB, 30B, 30D, 30E, 30F, 30FA, 30FC, 30FD, 30G, 30H and 30R of Part IIA of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), concerning unlawful associations, should be repealed.

Other offences under Part IIA

4.53 Part IIA also contains three other offences that do not directly rely on the concept of an unlawful association.

Section 30C

4.54 Section 30C is another sedition-type provision, which makes it an offence punishable by imprisonment for up to two years for any person, ‘who by speech or

writing advocates or encourages’:

(a) the overthrow of the Constitution of the Commonwealth by revolution or sabotage;

(b) the overthrow by force or violence of an established government of the Commonwealth or of a State or of any other civilized country or of organized government; or (c) the destruction or injury of property of the Commonwealth or of property used in trade or commerce with other countries or among the States.

4.55 This provision is effectively another version of the sedition offence found in s 80.2(1) of the Criminal Code—albeit with a lesser penalty. In Chapter 9, the ALRC suggests that s 30C is redundant and recommends that it be repealed.71 Sections 30J and 30K

4.56 Sections 30J and 30K are more closely related to emergency or industrial powers than to the banning of unlawful associations. Reflecting the origins of Part IIA in the seamen’s union strike, s 30J provides that in the event of a ‘serious industrial disturbance prejudicing or threatening trade and commerce with other countries or among the States’, the Governor-General may issue a proclamation prohibiting persons from taking part in, inciting, urging, aiding or continuing, a strike or lock-out in

relation to:

–  –  –

• employment in or connection with, the transport of goods or the conveyance of passengers in trade or commerce with other countries or among the states;72

• employment in, or in connection with, the provision of any public service by the Commonwealth or by any Department or public authority under the Commonwealth.73

4.57 It appears that such a proclamation only has been made once in Australia, in 1951.74

4.58 Section 30K deals with threats or boycotts affecting public services. A person who by violence, threats, intimidation or boycotts obstructs or hinders the performance of public services or hinders trade or commerce between the states or other countries is guilty of an offence. The maximum penalty for an offence under s 30K is imprisonment for one year.

4.59 The justification for ss 30J and 30K at the time of enactment was that the sanctions were needed ‘to prevent the dislocation of interstate and overseas trade and commerce and the working of Commonwealth services and authorities’.75 H P Lee notes that, unlike the state governments, the Commonwealth—largely for constitutional reasons—does not have comprehensive ‘emergency powers’ type legislation.76

4.60 The Gibbs Committee noted that the question of the appropriate wording and operation of ss 30J and 30K should be considered in the context of industrial relations legislation, rather than a review of the Crimes Act. The Committee also noted that ‘it may be convenient to remove sub-sections 30J and 30K from the Crimes Act and to include any amended substitution for them in legislation dealing with industrial relations’.77

4.61 In a modern context, serious industrial disputes of this nature almost certainly would be handled under the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth), rather than the Crimes Act. The Australian Government’s amendments to the Workplace Relations Act, as part of the WorkChoices legislation introduced in 2005,78 include provisions under which industrial action may be terminated in certain circumstances. For 72 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) s 30J(2)(a).

73 Ibid s 30J(2)(b).

74 Government Gazettes 1951, 623 and 802.

75 E Sykes and H Glasbeek Labour Law in Australia (1972), 541, cited in H Lee, Emergency Powers (1984), 166.

76 Ibid, 166.

77 H Gibbs, R Watson and A Menzies, Review of Commonwealth Criminal Law: Offences Relating to the Security and Defence of the Commonwealth, Discussion Paper No 8 (1988), 29.

78 Workplace Relations Amendment (WorkChoices) Act 2005 (Cth).

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 14 | 15 || 17 | 18 |   ...   | 49 |

Similar works:

«IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 2-642 / 12-0035 Filed November 15, 2012 MIKE OOLMAN, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, vs. ICON AG SOLUTIONS, L.L.C., Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee. Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Sioux County, Jeffrey A. Neary, Judge. Employer appeals from a jury verdict awarding damages for breach of an employment contract. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. Joel D. Vos, James W. Redmond, and Peter J. Leo of Heidman Law Firm, L.L.P., Sioux City, for appellant. Alex M....»

«BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F513456 DEWAYNE LOUGHRIDGE, Employee CLAIMANT WAL-MART STORES, INC., Employer RESPONDENT CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, INC., Carrier RESPONDENT OPINION FILED OCTOBER 16, 2007 Hearing before ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE GREGORY K. STEWART in Springdale, Washington County, Arkansas. Claimant represented by JOHN VERKAMP, Attorney, Fort Smith, Arkansas. Respondents represented by TOD C. BASSETT, Attorney, Fayetteville, Arkansas. STATEMENT OF THE CASE On...»

«REPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 1563 September Term, 2013 JAMES B. NUTTER & CO. v. EDWINA E. BLACK ET AL. Kehoe, Berger, Nazarian, JJ. Opinion by Kehoe, J. Filed: September 30, 2015 This opinion is about the scope of legal protections afforded to individuals who are unable to handle their financial affairs in a responsible manner because of a physical or mental condition. We will use the terms “disabled,” “under a disability,” and “subject to guardianship...»

«ON THE USE AND ABUSE OF NECESSITY IN THE LAW OF STATE RESPONSIBILITY Boston University School of Law Working Paper No. 11-16 (March 28, 2011) Robert D. Sloane This paper can be downloaded without charge at: http://www.bu.edu/law/faculty/scholarship/workingpapers/2011.html ON THE USE AND ABUSE OF NECESSITY IN THE LAW OF STATE RESPONSIBILITY Robert D. Sloane* ABSTRACT In an era of crises (economic, environmental, humanitarian, and even existential), the defensive plea of necessity has become a...»

«Preaching for God’s Alistair Begg Preaching for God’s Glory Copyright © 2010 by the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals Published by Crossway 1300 Crescent Street Wheaton, Illinois 60187 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher, except as provided by USA copyright law. The Alliance of...»

«The Pros & Cons of School Construction Delivery Methods California League of Bond Oversight Committees May 10, 2013 Kevin R. Carlin, Esq. CARLIN LAW GROUP, APC (619)615-5325 School Districts Have Limited Powers • A public school district is a public entity with limited powers. – “A board of school trustees is an administrative agency created by statute and invested only with the powers expressly conferred by the Legislature and cannot exceed the powers granted to them.” Paterson v....»

«May 2013 Family Law Section SPOUSAL SUPPORT – A MEDIATOR'S PERSPECTIVE By Philip M. Epstein Q.C. There can be little doubt that the introduction and acceptance of the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines has had a dramatic impact on spousal support. It is rare that a reported case does not consider the SSAG and it would be rarer still if counsel discussing a spousal support case did not consider the Guidelines. However, the introduction of the SSAG has not eliminated spousal support litigation...»


«MUST OMBUDSMEN RETAIN REMIT OVER PRIVATISED SERVICES? Brian Thompson, School of Law, University of Liverpool, Chatham Street, Liverpool L19 3RJ U.K. wbt@liverpool.ac.uk MUST OMBUDSMEN RETAIN REMIT OVER PRIVATISED SERVICES? Brian Thompson, School of Law, University of Liverpool As services are privatised there are several possibilities as to how consumer complaints can be handled:  Public Ombudsmen can retain remit;  There can be special arrangements for Public Ombudsmen ...»

«Part E – Verifying and counting the votes Greater London Authority elections on 5 May 2016: guidance for Returning Officers Published December 2015 (last updated March 2016 to add chapter’s 2 onwards) In this guidance we use ‘must’ when we refer to a specific legal requirement. We use ‘should’ for items we consider to be recommended practice, but which are not legal requirements. Translations and other formats For information on obtaining this publication in another language or in a...»

«EQUITABLE POWERS IN BANKRUPTCY REHABILITATION: PROTECTION OF THE DEBTOR AND THE DOOMSDAY PRINCIPLE PAUL F. FESTERSEN* The prophecies of what the courts will do in fact, and nothing more pretentious, are what I mean by the Jaw. Mr. Justice Holmes, The Path of the Law (1897) About half of the Bankruptcy Act,, by volume, has to do with the rehabilitation rather than the interment of the financially distressed. Section 77, and Chapters X, XI, XII and XIII make possible different types of therapy...»

«HUNGARY Hungary is a republic with a population of approximately 10 million and a multiparty parliamentary democracy. Legislative authority is vested in the unicameral parliament (National Assembly). The National Assembly elects the head of state, the president, every five years. The president appoints a prime minister from the majority party or coalition. The National Assembly elections on April 11 and 25 were assessed as free and fair, with the conservative FideszChristian Democrat (KDNP)...»

<<  HOME   |    CONTACTS
2017 www.thesis.dislib.info - Online materials, documents

Materials of this site are available for review, all rights belong to their respective owners.
If you do not agree with the fact that your material is placed on this site, please, email us, we will within 1-2 business days delete him.