Operation Fortitude
Stage 1 Legal Studies
Bayden Curnow
Issues Study
The Issue:
Over the last few months, there has been a deal of controversy in the media and general public due to the introduction of a new department, the Australian Border Force, by now former Prime Minister Tony Abbott.The Australian Border Force merges the functionality of the Department of Immigration and Border Protection into one organisation. A number of concerns have arisen about the powers that Border Force possesses, as well as concerns about the militarisation of immigration. These concerns culminated into outrage after the release of details regarding Operation Fortitude, with many drawing comparisons between the Australian Border Force and secret police units from authoritarian …show more content…
nations.
The Law:
The Australian Border Force was created by the Abbott government, effectively combining immigration and customs but with considerably more power.
Border Force primarily operates in airports, seaports and detention centres, overseeing border protection operations such as Operation Sovereign Borders. The controversy over the cancelled Operation Fortitude, even though Abbott reassured the public that Border Force would never stop people randomly on the street, illustrates the fear in the general public over the power Border Force possesses. In Operation Fortitude, officers were supposedly going to stop individuals on the street and ask for identification, with the planned operation appearing to show that Border Force officers have the ability to randomly check identification without reasonable suspicion. The department also appears to be militarised to an extent, with officers possessing military style uniforms and firearms. Officers have the power to conduct surveillance and detain individuals. The fact that the Border Force act also allows whistleblowers in detention centres to be prosecuted, causes Border Force to appear to be an extremely powerful department, with any potential offences committed by them going unreported due to the non disclosure …show more content…
law.
Diversity of views:
Views on the existence of Border Force are varied. Citizens opposed to the existence of Border Force, and the powers granted to it, claiming that Border Force are comparable to Stalinist-like secret police. Some have claimed that Border Force's military style uniforms resemble that of a fascist regime. Opponents have also claimed that the Australian Border Force is a threat to the freedom and liberties that Australians hold dear. Another claim put forward is that Border Force abuses detainees in detention centres, and attempts to conceal the abuse through the legislation that prohibits contracted workers from disclosing information about detention centres. The most intense backlash from both politicians and the general public occurred just after the cancellation of Operation Fortitude. Independent MP Andrew Wilkie stated that 'Joseph Stalin would be proud' of Tony Abbott, and that the Stasi would be 'delighted' with the Australian Border Force. The media played a large role in the backlash against Operation Fortitude, reporting on the criticisms of the operation. This approach to the reporting of the cancelled operation drew criticism from some right wing media sources, who claimed that the situation was overly sensationalised and that the criticism of the operation was over exaggerated.
Although there has been extremely limited support for Border Force in the public and media, some claimed that the media reaction to Operation Fortitude was excessive and simply a fear mongering campaign. This line of thought has been reiterated by the government, who stated that Border Force officers were never going to stop individuals in the street and check their identification. Instead, they claimed the controversy was a result of an error by a low level employee in the department and an over exaggerated response in the media, with Tony Abbott claiming that 'Border Force does an absolutely outstanding job' and that they shouldn't be 'pilloried' on the basis of a badly-worded press release. Furthermore, Abbott credited Border Force with stopping the boats, preventing deaths at sea, and protecting the territorial integrity of Australia.
Legal Implications:
The legal implications of the introduction of Border Force are concerning, with the organisation's existence arguably setting a precedent for the creation of similar government organisations with powers equal to, or perhaps greater than that of Border Force.
Border Force's creation could potentially lead to increased militarisation of customs and immigration, with officials in these departments gradually appearing less like public servants and more like soldiers. The argument can also be made that militarisation of immigration and customs could also occur in other departments, with government departments progressively appearing more authoritarian. The introduction of the Border Force act, which includes preventing workers at detention centres from disclosing information, has caused concerns about human rights abuses. This legislation has worrying legal implications, as it sets a precedent for allowing government departments to conduct activities without risk of any misconduct committed becoming public
knowledge.
Conclusion:
Although the purpose of Border Force was to create a more effective and proficient customs and border protection organisation, the powers granted to Border Force have a number of worrying legal implications. While some of the backlash and criticism can be dismissed as exaggerated and sensationalised, there is no doubt that the concerns raised have some merit to them. Both the militarisation and the level of power of Border Force raises questions about the transparency of government organisations, and whether Australia is granting departments and organisations, which are supposedly acting in our interests, too much power.
References
ABC News,. 'Medical Professionals Stage Protest Over Law That Criminalises Detention Centre Whistle Blowers'. N.p., 2015. Web. 7 Sept. 2015.
ABC News,. 'What Is The Australian Border Force?'. N.p., 2015. Web. 5 Sept. 2015.
Border.gov.au,. 'Australian Border Force'. N.p., 2015. Web. 4 Sept. 2015.
Hasham, Nicole. 'Australian Border Force Farce Leaves Tony Abbott Under Fire'. The Sydney Morning Herald. N.p., 2015. Web. 6 Sept. 2015.
Hasham, Nicole. 'What The Australian Border Force Wants In Its New Recruits: Must Be Willing To Take Oath, Use Force And Fire A Gun'. The Sydney Morning Herald. N.p., 2015. Web. 9 Sept. 2015.
NewsComAu,. 'Abbott: Don’T Demean The Border Force'. N.p., 2015. Web. 11 Sept. 2015.
Theaustralian.com.au,. '‘Police State’: Shorten Under Fire'. N.p., 2015. Web. 20 Sept. 2015.
Bayden Curnow
Issues Study
The Issue:
Over the last few months, there has been a deal of controversy in the media and general public due to the introduction of a new department, the Australian Border Force, by now former Prime Minister Tony Abbott.The Australian Border Force merges the functionality of the Department of Immigration and Border Protection into one organisation. A number of concerns have arisen about the powers that Border Force possesses, as well as concerns about the militarisation of immigration. These concerns culminated into outrage after the release of details regarding Operation Fortitude, with many drawing comparisons between the Australian Border Force and secret police units from authoritarian …show more content…
nations.
The Law:
The Australian Border Force was created by the Abbott government, effectively combining immigration and customs but with considerably more power.
Border Force primarily operates in airports, seaports and detention centres, overseeing border protection operations such as Operation Sovereign Borders. The controversy over the cancelled Operation Fortitude, even though Abbott reassured the public that Border Force would never stop people randomly on the street, illustrates the fear in the general public over the power Border Force possesses. In Operation Fortitude, officers were supposedly going to stop individuals on the street and ask for identification, with the planned operation appearing to show that Border Force officers have the ability to randomly check identification without reasonable suspicion. The department also appears to be militarised to an extent, with officers possessing military style uniforms and firearms. Officers have the power to conduct surveillance and detain individuals. The fact that the Border Force act also allows whistleblowers in detention centres to be prosecuted, causes Border Force to appear to be an extremely powerful department, with any potential offences committed by them going unreported due to the non disclosure …show more content…
law.
Diversity of views:
Views on the existence of Border Force are varied. Citizens opposed to the existence of Border Force, and the powers granted to it, claiming that Border Force are comparable to Stalinist-like secret police. Some have claimed that Border Force's military style uniforms resemble that of a fascist regime. Opponents have also claimed that the Australian Border Force is a threat to the freedom and liberties that Australians hold dear. Another claim put forward is that Border Force abuses detainees in detention centres, and attempts to conceal the abuse through the legislation that prohibits contracted workers from disclosing information about detention centres. The most intense backlash from both politicians and the general public occurred just after the cancellation of Operation Fortitude. Independent MP Andrew Wilkie stated that 'Joseph Stalin would be proud' of Tony Abbott, and that the Stasi would be 'delighted' with the Australian Border Force. The media played a large role in the backlash against Operation Fortitude, reporting on the criticisms of the operation. This approach to the reporting of the cancelled operation drew criticism from some right wing media sources, who claimed that the situation was overly sensationalised and that the criticism of the operation was over exaggerated.
Although there has been extremely limited support for Border Force in the public and media, some claimed that the media reaction to Operation Fortitude was excessive and simply a fear mongering campaign. This line of thought has been reiterated by the government, who stated that Border Force officers were never going to stop individuals in the street and check their identification. Instead, they claimed the controversy was a result of an error by a low level employee in the department and an over exaggerated response in the media, with Tony Abbott claiming that 'Border Force does an absolutely outstanding job' and that they shouldn't be 'pilloried' on the basis of a badly-worded press release. Furthermore, Abbott credited Border Force with stopping the boats, preventing deaths at sea, and protecting the territorial integrity of Australia.
Legal Implications:
The legal implications of the introduction of Border Force are concerning, with the organisation's existence arguably setting a precedent for the creation of similar government organisations with powers equal to, or perhaps greater than that of Border Force.
Border Force's creation could potentially lead to increased militarisation of customs and immigration, with officials in these departments gradually appearing less like public servants and more like soldiers. The argument can also be made that militarisation of immigration and customs could also occur in other departments, with government departments progressively appearing more authoritarian. The introduction of the Border Force act, which includes preventing workers at detention centres from disclosing information, has caused concerns about human rights abuses. This legislation has worrying legal implications, as it sets a precedent for allowing government departments to conduct activities without risk of any misconduct committed becoming public
knowledge.
Conclusion:
Although the purpose of Border Force was to create a more effective and proficient customs and border protection organisation, the powers granted to Border Force have a number of worrying legal implications. While some of the backlash and criticism can be dismissed as exaggerated and sensationalised, there is no doubt that the concerns raised have some merit to them. Both the militarisation and the level of power of Border Force raises questions about the transparency of government organisations, and whether Australia is granting departments and organisations, which are supposedly acting in our interests, too much power.
References
ABC News,. 'Medical Professionals Stage Protest Over Law That Criminalises Detention Centre Whistle Blowers'. N.p., 2015. Web. 7 Sept. 2015.
ABC News,. 'What Is The Australian Border Force?'. N.p., 2015. Web. 5 Sept. 2015.
Border.gov.au,. 'Australian Border Force'. N.p., 2015. Web. 4 Sept. 2015.
Hasham, Nicole. 'Australian Border Force Farce Leaves Tony Abbott Under Fire'. The Sydney Morning Herald. N.p., 2015. Web. 6 Sept. 2015.
Hasham, Nicole. 'What The Australian Border Force Wants In Its New Recruits: Must Be Willing To Take Oath, Use Force And Fire A Gun'. The Sydney Morning Herald. N.p., 2015. Web. 9 Sept. 2015.
NewsComAu,. 'Abbott: Don’T Demean The Border Force'. N.p., 2015. Web. 11 Sept. 2015.
Theaustralian.com.au,. '‘Police State’: Shorten Under Fire'. N.p., 2015. Web. 20 Sept. 2015.