Effectiveness Of Australian Law And Terrorism Kyle Luker
Evaluate the effectiveness of Australian law in balancing the rights of the individual and the state in the face of growing international terrorism
In coordination with the growing outcomes of terrorism, both international and domestic, we can examine the effectiveness of Australian Law in balancing the rights of the individual and the state. Throughout the course of time we see the changing face of international terrorism and how it has implications that are far reaching and affect our day to day rights and freedoms. I will be referring to the following cases in my response; Mohamed Haneef, David Hicks, Peter Greste and also Australian citizens involved in ISIL.
Terrorism is an emerging and ongoing threat that says much about the fast-changing nature of global terrorism and the challenges Australia and the West face in trying to frame laws that can respond to the shifting threat without unduly infringing civil liberties. Dr Mohamed Haneef, an Indian national, was arrested at Brisbane airport on 2 July 2007 in connection with a failed London bomb plot. He was held for twelve days before being charged with providing support to a terrorist organisation. The charge was unsustainable and was quickly dropped. However, in the interim Dr Haneef's immigration visa was cancelled on character grounds - a decision which on review was found to be unlawful. The arrest, detention, charge and subsequent release of Dr Mohamed Haneef represented the first time that a number of legislative provisions, introduced to respond to the threat of terrorism, were relied on in practice. 1
The case revealed significant deficiencies in those provisions and a marked inconsistency between their actual and intended operation. In particular, the case revealed: problems with the operation and application of sections 3W, section 15AA and Part 1C of the Crimes Act - most notably the "dead time" provisions; problems with the Criminal Code terrorist organisation offence provisions; and
Problems
In coordination with the growing outcomes of terrorism, both international and domestic, we can examine the effectiveness of Australian Law in balancing the rights of the individual and the state. Throughout the course of time we see the changing face of international terrorism and how it has implications that are far reaching and affect our day to day rights and freedoms. I will be referring to the following cases in my response; Mohamed Haneef, David Hicks, Peter Greste and also Australian citizens involved in ISIL.
Terrorism is an emerging and ongoing threat that says much about the fast-changing nature of global terrorism and the challenges Australia and the West face in trying to frame laws that can respond to the shifting threat without unduly infringing civil liberties. Dr Mohamed Haneef, an Indian national, was arrested at Brisbane airport on 2 July 2007 in connection with a failed London bomb plot. He was held for twelve days before being charged with providing support to a terrorist organisation. The charge was unsustainable and was quickly dropped. However, in the interim Dr Haneef's immigration visa was cancelled on character grounds - a decision which on review was found to be unlawful. The arrest, detention, charge and subsequent release of Dr Mohamed Haneef represented the first time that a number of legislative provisions, introduced to respond to the threat of terrorism, were relied on in practice. 1
The case revealed significant deficiencies in those provisions and a marked inconsistency between their actual and intended operation. In particular, the case revealed: problems with the operation and application of sections 3W, section 15AA and Part 1C of the Crimes Act - most notably the "dead time" provisions; problems with the Criminal Code terrorist organisation offence provisions; and
Problems
Bibliography: 1. Mohamed Haneef Case. 2014. Mohamed Haneef Case. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.lawcouncil.asn.au/lawcouncil/index.php/10-divisions/145-mohamed-haneef-case. [Accessed 21 August 2014]. 2. Mohamed Haneef Case. 2014. Mohamed Haneef Case. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.lawcouncil.asn.au/lawcouncil/ [Accessed 21 August 2014]. 3. Australian International Law – Australia’s legal system and effectiveness. Peter Greste - Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. 2014.[ONLINE] [Accessed 21 August 2014]. 4. Australian David Hicks —- MiamiHerald.com. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/08/20/4300720/australian-david-hicks-guantanamos.html. [Accessed 21 August 2014]