New laws will allow those who have not committed a crime to be held
for up to 14 days simply because the Attorney General think they
might. We have no bill of rights in Australia. There are no limits to
what a government can legislate against citizens. Australia is
becoming a fascist country.
There is no hope. The average person doesn't care. We're fucked!
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/track-and-tag--the-new-war-on-
terrorism/2005/09/08/1125772641058.html
http://tinyurl.com/9vky9
Track and tag - the new war on terrorism
By Cynthia Banham and Marian Wilkinson
September 9, 2005
Federal police will be able to fit terrorist suspects with tracking
devices for 12 months, and their state counterparts could be allowed
to hold people without charge for two weeks, under Federal Government
plans to toughen security laws.
The Government also plans to make it harder for foreigners to get
Australian citizenship and to introduce new offences of inciting
violence against community groups and Australian forces overseas, and
leaving baggage unattended at airports.
Announcing the new measures, which were met with concern from civil
liberty groups, lawyers and some Coalition MPs, the Prime Minister,
John Howard, said they were "unusual" but were necessary "to cope with
an unusual and threatening situation".
"There is nothing in these measures that can possibly be regarded as
creating a quasi-police state," he said.
Mr Howard said the planned laws, which are light on detail and have
yet to be drafted, would not have a "sunset clause" requiring
Parliament to re-enact them. They arose out of a review of counter-
terrorism laws ordered by the Prime Minister after the London bombings
in July.
At their centre is the creation of "control orders" - similar to
apprehended violence orders - on people who "pose a terrorist risk to
the community". Federal police officers would be able to ask courts -
possibly in a closed session - for an order to fit tracking devices on
suspects and to restrict their travel and who they met.
Federal police would also be able to detain people in a "terrorism
situation" for 48 hours, demand documents and obtain airline passenger
information, and have increased powers of "stop, question and search".
The Federal Government will ask the states at a premiers' meeting
later this month to give state police powers to detain suspects for up
to 14 days. Mr Howard said this was needed to give police time to
"prevent the destruction of evidence to prevent the trail going cold"
after a terrorist attack.
The Premier, Morris Iemma, said he would consider the proposals before
the premiers met on September 27.
The Federal Government will also ask the premiers to consider more
random baggage searches and closed circuit television at transport
hubs and places of "mass gatherings".
Existing offences for financing terrorism, providing false or
misleading information to ASIO and threatening aviation security will
be strengthened, as will ASIO's search powers. The Government also
plans to increase the waiting period for citizenship applications from
two years to three, and reserve the right to refuse applications on
security grounds.
The president of the Council for Civil Liberties, Terry O'Gorman, said
once in place, the laws would never be removed. "The Prime Minister
said today this combined package of powers will not mean a police
state," he said. "We say it very much holds the potential for that to
happen."
The Australia Defence Association questioned the Government's refusal
to use a sunset clause. The association's executive director, Neil
James, said it would make the laws more palatable.
Lex Lasry, QC, of the Victorian Criminal Bar Association, accused the
Government of frightening the public, and "having frightened them into
thinking a terrorist attack is going to happen any day, taking away
some pretty fundamental rights".
Waleed Kadous from the Muslim Civil Rights Network said the
announcement meant "a radical shift in the civil rights of all
Australians … it will push us more towards a police state".
Some Coalition backbenchers, including Petro Georgiou and senators
George Brandis and Marise Payne, complained the initiatives, which
were outlined to them in a Coalition party room meeting before they
were announced publicly, were "imposed" upon them without
consultation. They said it was a "rorting" of the parliamentary
process.
Mr Howard defended the timing of his announcement. He said he wanted
to announce it before he left for New York on Sunday for the UN 2005
World Summit, and it was "absurd" to suggest it was designed to
deflect attention from the Telstra furore.
The Opposition said it would examine the proposals when more details
were available. "Labor supports measures which will genuinely protect
Australians against the threat of terrorist attack," said Labor's
spokesman on homeland security, Arch Bevis.
BARRAGE OF LAWS
- 12-month control orders on terrorist suspects.
- Criminalise financing of terrorist acts.
- ASIO access to airline passenger information.
- Waiting period for citizenship extended.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/fear-that-law-changes-will-curb-
free-speech/2005/09/08/1125772641106.html
http://tinyurl.com/cggag
Fear that law changes will curb free speech
By Tom Allard
September 9, 2005
Civil libertarians, media groups and Muslims have voiced alarm at the
Federal Government's proposed introduction of tough new laws
prohibiting the "incitement of violence", saying they were a curb on
free speech.
The Prime Minister, John Howard, announced the controversial changes
yesterday, arguing that a new legal regime was required in the age of
terrorism.
The proposed laws would forbid comments "inciting violence" against
groups. As well, statements that might encourage violence against
Australian troops overseas would be outlawed, as well as those that
provided support to "Australia's enemies".
Waleed Kadous, the convener of the Australian Muslim Civil Rights
Advocacy Network, said he was "deeply concerned about how this will
impact on quite legitimate free speech".
"What about someone who says that the people of Iraq have the right to
resist the occupation?" he said. "That would contravene these laws.
You may not personally agree with that but it is something you should
be able to say."
The president of the NSW Council for Civil Liberties, Cameron Murphy,
said the proposed laws were hugely problematic. "It's very difficult
to define when someone is inciting violence," he said. "It's an
absolute nightmare."
Legislation is yet to be drafted but Mr Howard had a go at drawing the
distinction between legitimate political debate and inciting violence.
People could criticise him and his Government for troop deployments
but would have to refrain from "actually encouraging people to attack
them", he said. "It's not designed in any way to hamper or hinder free
speech and political comment."
But Mr Murphy pointed to two distinct problems: whether someone can be
charged with inciting violence if no violent act follows, and whether
the new penalties would apply if someone did act violently based on
someone's statements, but the person who made them did not intend to
provoke the response.
Asked about this issue yesterday - in the context of a journalist's
report inadvertently sparking a terrorist act - Mr Howard declined to
respond, saying he would not give a legal opinion.
Mr Murphy used the example of a fundamentalist Christian priest who
expressed the commonly held interpretation of the Bible that
homosexuality was evil.
"What happens if someone hears that and then attacks a homosexual?
Should that priest be charged with the offence of inciting violence?"
he said. "That's what the Government is suggesting. It's a dangerous
way to deal with this issue, and the wrong way."
He said it was more effective to debate extremists publicly and
challenge their views. "Laws don't change people's extremist views. It
just sends them underground, or it creates martyrs."
Both Mr Murphy and Mr Kadous said existing laws against the incitement
of violence, treason and racial vilification worked well and did not
need to be strengthened further.
The director of corporate affairs for John Fairfax (publisher of the
Herald), Bruce Wolpe, pointed to another possible impact of the new
laws on freedom of speech.
The new "notice to produce" powers for the Australian Federal Police
could require journalists to hand over their notes and recordings,
including those made during interviews of confidential sources.
Mr Wolpe said the Government had not consulted with publishers and
said it was alarming there was no sunset clause attached to the
proposed laws.
But Neil James of the Australia Defence Association supported the
beefing up of sedition laws, acknowledging they would "go beyond what
would be traditionally regarded as matters of normal peacetime crime".
Mr James said authorities had been powerless to prosecute Australian
activists who openly supported communist North Vietnam in the 1960s
and 1970s.
--
Remove YOUR_SHOES before replying
apatriot #1, atheist #1417,
Chief EAC prophet
Jason Gastrich is praying for me on 8 January 2009
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~pk1956/
Apatriotism Yahoo Group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/apatriotism
Sunday: A day given over by Americans to wishing that they themselves
were dead and in Heaven, and that their neighbors were dead and in
Hell.
-Mencken
.
|
