Skip to main content

90 91 92 93

Manning Clark House Inc. welcomes speakers from a wide range of backgrounds. Among those recent have been Stephen Moore, Justice Michael Kirby, Prue Acton and Bishop George Browning. Photographer: Peter Hislop

Points on Security and Human Rights

Event

Weekend of Ideas 2008: Australian Citizenship - is it really worth having?

Date

Saturday, March 29, 2008
Clive Williams, Adjunct Professor, ANU

Clive Williams, Adjunct Professor, ANU. Photographer: Peter Hislop

by Clive Williams, Adjunct Professor, ANU

Presented at Manning Clark House Weekend of Ideas "Australian Citizenship - is it really worth having?", 29-30 March 2008

The security environment has changed considerably since 9/11 and, while we have become more complacent in recent years, a real threat still exists of a terrorist attack in Australia intended to cause maximum casualties.

National security was obviously politicised under Howard and we need to strike a better balance under Rudd between addressing security problems and preserving civil liberties. Regrettably, journalists who work on national security issues tell me that there is no more transparency under Rudd than there was under Howard. Tougher FOI access in particular needs to be reviewed.

Tactical defensive measures such as border security, aviation security and port security have been greatly enhanced since 9/11. Few now complain about these measures. In fact we get complaints when security is not evident.

Security threat concern now centres on home-grown self-radicalised elements, not only from the Islamic community, but also right wing individuals - as well as potentially dangerous fixated individuals who are not adequately monitored under our current system.

The major concern of security agencies is to prevent a Bali-like incident in Australia that could cause 100+ deaths and seriously damage our relaxed Australian way of life.

We therefore do need appropriate legislation to prevent terrorism from occurring.

This may mean holding terrorism suspects incommunicado for a potentially lengthy period (perhaps 28+ days?)(As in the UK - but note also that those detained in the UK are protected by the UK Human Rights Act 1998 and the European Convention on Human Rights.)

Why do we need a longer period of detention?

Because it can take a long time to check out relevant detail overseas

Exploitation of forensic material can take a while, particularly if seized computers contain foreign language or encrypted data

Render-safe of hazardous materials prior to forensic examination can cause investigation delays

Suspects may be a flight risk

But we need to avoid:

AFP, ASIO and Ministerial abuses of the security system (note the mishandled Jack Thomas, Haneef and ul-Haque cases)

Trial by media - or media stampeding the authorities into hasty decisions, as happened with the Haneef case

Slow investigation progress because of any additional detention time available

Rushed legislation, as in 2005 – government needs to engage and consult with the public and legal community

Federal government lack of transparency

To achieve fairness we need to:

Rationalise the location in the federal bureaucracy of security-related agencies

Introduce a federal bill of human rights. (Australia is the only western democracy without one.)

Have in place appropriate safeguards by way of review and supervisory mechanisms for detainees and those remanded in custody on terrorism related charges. (Outside of the APS bureaucracy.)

Provide appropriate levels of compensation to subsequently unconvicted individuals ($5,000 per day of detention?) to come out of the relevant agency’s budget!

While we have done reasonably well tactically in addressing the terrorism threat, we have failed woefully at the strategic level.

Examples are:

The Howard government’s “me too” strategic policies - following the US in its misguided GWOT, that reduced our international options and increased the threat in Australia and Australians abroad. (Military action is unlikely to achieve positive outcomes in either Iraq or Afghanistan.)

Failure to engage diplomatically with radicalisation causative factors - such as the Palestinian, Kashmir and Mindanao problems.

A need to better communicate our foreign policies internally within Australia to relevant communities. (Many Muslims were stunned by Rudd’s recent wholehearted endorsement of Israel, despite its ongoing human rights abuses.)

Achieving national security and community harmony should be a holistic issue, involving education, immigration, local govt etc

And we should not forget that national security is not only about terrorism or crime, but also about security issues flowing from neglected problems such as climate change, illegal fishing etc

 

Clive Williams

Adjunct Professor

ANU