New anti-terrorist laws for Australia? Balancing democratic rights against national security

Abstract

My starting point may be different to that of some people here. I believe that the Australian federal Parliament should enact new anti-terrorism laws. After September 11, such laws are required from the perspective of community confidence and also to fulfill Australias international obligations. Before September 11, there were no federal laws dealing specifically with terrorism (in fact such laws could only be found in the Northern Territory ). While we need a national legislative response to terrorism, any new laws must strike a balance between national defence and security, and important public values and fundamental human rights. We must not pass laws that damage the same democratic freedoms we are seeking to protect from terrorism. My paper today addresses whether the Governments legislative response to September 11 has achieved the right balance. I argue that it has clearly failed to do so. In fact, the Bills introduced in March 2002 into Parliament pose as great a threat to Australian democracy as Prime Minister Robert Menzies attempt to ban communism in 1950. If passed, the new terrorism bills may do more to undermine the long term health of our democratic system than any threat currently posed by terrorism. I will begin with an examination of the Security Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Bill 2002 (Terrorism Bill). That Bill has now been enacted by Parliament, but only after being substantially amended to meet a number of objections. I then examine the ASIO Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Bill 2002 (ASIO Bill), which has yet to be passed and arguably poses the greater threat to our democratic system.