New anti-terror laws and the Muslim community : Melbourne Indymedia

On 8 September the Prime Minister introduced a 12-point plan outlining new anti-terror laws in a press release. Two weeks later he went to the Council of Australian Governments meeting with the proposals. They approved the measures by and large.

However, until last Friday (14 October) the public had not seen the laws. This all changed when Jon Stanhope, the Chief Minister for the ACT, leaked draft anti-terror laws.

Since then, leading legal experts, academics, politicians and civil rights groups, including AMCRAN, have been carefully analysing the legislation.

It is now clear that there are serious human rights concerns with the draft legislation, that it is open to abuse in its application and that it does not carry the safeguards that the Prime Minister promised.

In this e-mail we will outline the new anti-terror laws as drafted and explain some of the practical implications of the new laws, with an emphasis on the impact on the Muslim community. We will also look at what you can do about these laws.

The information in this e-mail is based on the draft legislation released by Mr Jon Stanhope on 14 October 2005 (available here:
http://www.chiefminister.act.gov.au/docs/B05PG201_v281.pdf).
The Government has already indicated that further changes will be made.

-------------- CONTROL ORDERS --------------

Control orders allow a person to be put under house arrest, to be forced to wear a tracking device, to be stopped from using phones or internet, or a number of other measures. Violating a control order carries a 5year penalty, even if unintentionally. Control orders can last for up to a year, or 3 months if you are between 16 and 18. But the new legislation specifically allows for "rolling" control orders; i.e., one control order finishes, and the next one begins. This means that it is possible that someone could have control orders apply to them for the term of their natural life; with control orders issued year after year after year.

The judge can make control orders if the order would substantially assist in preventing a terrorist act; or if the person has provided training to, or received training from, a banned terror organisation.

When control orders are issued, the judge doesn't have to meet the usual standards of "beyond reasonable doubt" for criminal charges. It is a "balance of probabilities" test; in other words, the judge only has to believe it is more likely than not that the person meets the above criteria. Hence control orders can be seen as a "back door" to imprisoning someone if you don't have enough evidence to charge them with a normal offence.

What's more, it is a "guilty until proven innocent" approach. A police officer, with the Attorney General's permission, goes to a judge and requests a control order. The subject of the order is then taken into custody. Only once they are in custody can they apply for the order to be revoked, with the limitations of the control order imposed on them (for example, if you can't use the phone and you can't leave home, trying to contact a lawyer might be a little difficult).

Muslim community impact: Because it's a "balance of probabilities" test, rather than "beyond reasonable doubt" test, and because the subject of the order isn't even there at the time the decision is made there is the potential for stereotypes and racial profiling. This could lead to many innocent people being imprisoned.

Also, the "training with a terrorist organisation" clause is retrospective, so it would apply to people who might have -- many years ago -- worked with Hamas or Lashkar-e-Taiba, before they were outlawed and before September 11. There is already a crime for "training with a terrorist organisation", but this seems to be a backdoor way to limit the freedoms of people who can't be found guilty of a crime.

------------PREVENTATIVE DETENTION --------------

The police can get a preventative detention order to hold a person for up to 24 hours. This initial preventative detention order can be issued by the Federal Police alone without judicial approval. This can then be extended later to up to 48 hours. It can only be applied if police think there is a terrorist attack likely in the next 14 days, or there was a terrorist attack in the last 28 days. It is planned that the states will introduce legislation for the preventative detention to be extended for an additional 12 days.

When detained, you can talk to a lawyer, but only if they are security cleared; and all your conversations are monitored. If you want to talk to your lawyer in Arabic, then there has to be a translator there so the police can hear what you are saying. You can call your family, but you can only tell them that you are ok, and that you are not contactable -- if you say any more, you can go to prison for 5 years.

Once you are held under preventative detention, there is no provision for review of the decision.

Muslim community impact: It is possible that in the aftermath of a terrorist attack, many Muslims will be arrested to "preserve evidence", while the police try to work out what is going on and apply a "better safe than sorry" approach to detaining people. Indeed, in the aftermath of September 11, at least 70 people (all but one Muslim) were detained using the "material witness" laws in the US, the effect of which is similar to preventative detention. This is the most conservative estimate, because of secrecy, we don't how many were detained, but some estimates are as high as 1200.

---------RANDOM STOP AND SEARCH POWERS ---------

Police can stop you, ask you your name, address, proof of who you are, why you are somewhere and can search you, your vehicle or anything under your control; if they think that you "might have just committed, might be committing, or might be about to commit a terrorist act." If the police find something that they think can be used as part of a terrorist act, they can take it from you.

In addition, the Attorney General can declare an area (there is no limit on the size, could be "the Opera House", or could be "Lakemba") to be a "security zone" for up to 28 days. This declaration of a security zone, on the grounds of "preventing a terrorist act occurring; or in responding to a terrorist act that has occurred," means police don't have to have suspicion, they can just search everyone.

Muslim community impact: This opens a huge door for racial profiling -- it is more likely that Muslims will be searched. Furthermore, it may cause community backlash against Muslims as people blame Muslims for being subject to these measures. There is also a particular issue for women who wear hijaab or niqaab who might be requested to remove their hijaab as part of a search. There is no requirement that the search be conducted in private.

-------INCITEMENT, SEDITION AND "ADVOCATING" TERRORISM----

There are a number of complex measures relating to incitement and sedition. This would limit people's ability to speak openly about any armed conflict in the world, if it includes Australia or Australia's allies. For example, if a person said that "Iraqis have the right to resist the occupation of Iraq by Western occupiers," this statement could be considered seditious and would carry a sentence of up to 7 years.

Furthermore an organisation that adopted a stance such as the above, would be considered to be "advocating terrorism". Advocating terrorism is defined as „praising the doing of a terrorist act‰, „directly or indirectly counseling or urging the doing of a terrorist act, or directly or indirectly providing instructions on the doing of a terrorist act‰.

If that is the case, the organisation can be proscribed, which carries with it many offences. For example, being an informal member of such an organisation would carry a sentence of 10 years.

Muslim community impact: Muslims often express solidarity with the Muslim brothers and sisters elsewhere in the world, in places such as Iraq, Kashmir, Afghanistan and Palestine, and want their brothers and sisters to be free. In some cases, they express the point of view that these people have the right to use violence as a means of achieving their goals, just as the Australian Government advocated the use of violence to protect itself from weapons of mass destruction from Saddam Hussein. Such statements would now possibly illegal under these proposed laws.

------- CHARITY -------

The new provisions for financing of a terrorist organisation mean that many innocent people trying to support worthwhile causes could end up in prison for up to 15 years. Under the new measures, if someone asks you for help collecting charity for a cause and you help them, you have to check they are not using it for terrorist causes. For example, X asks you to help him raise money for victims of an earthquake in Pakistan. You help X to raise funds, but X then gives the funds to an organisation in Pakistan that as well as helping with the earthquake, also engages in activities the government thinks are illegal. You are now guilty of a crime that could find you in prison for 15 years.

Muslim community impact: There is the serious potential for innocent people with a sincere intention to help others will end up in prison for having done no wrong except for having taken someone's word. Furthermore, existing anti-terror laws have seen donations to charities in Australia decrease. These laws would reduce charity even more, and would create feelings of ill-will and suspicion among the community.

-------------- OTHER MEASURES --------------

Other measures in the anti-terror laws give police extensive powers to ask you to produce personal and private documents such as financial records and to find out about your travel patterns. Safeguards that ASIO have to meet when tapping phone calls and monitoring mail have also been weakened.

---------------- WHAT YOU CAN DO ----------------

These laws are likely to be introduced into Federal Parliament on 31 October. It is expected that the Senate will only have one week to scrutinise the draft laws by 8 November 2005. There is only very little time.

AMCRAN is working with many civil rights groups and also members of both political parties to prevent this legislation from going through. We are preparing to send out further action alerts closer to the date, so please keep an eye out. To keep up-to-date, subscribe to AMCRAN-news@amcran.org. You can do this by visiting:
http://www.amcran.org/index.php?id=30&Itemid=52

You can also write to your state premier, your state Attorney-General, to the Prime Minister, to the Attorney-General, and to your local Member of Parliament. Some parts of the laws require States to enact supporting legislation to the Federal law, so it is worth writing to both.

Arch Bevis Shadow Minister for Homeland Security Parliament House, Canberra Fax: (02) 6277 8534 Arch.Bevis.MP@aph.gov.au

For those in New South Wales: Morris Iemma Premier of New South Wales Fax: 02 9228 3934 http://www.nsw.gov.au">thepremier@http://www.nsw.gov.au>

Bob Debus NSW Attorney General Fax (02) 9228 3166 bob.debus@debus.minister.nsw.gov.au

For those in Victoria: Steve Bracks Premier of Victoria Fax: (03) 9397 7227 steve.bracks@parliament.vic.gov.au

Rob Hulls Vic Attorney General Fax: (03) 9379 4434 rob.hulls@parliament.vic.gov.au

For those in Canberra: Jon Stanhope Chief Minister and Attorney-General
Fax: (02) 62050433 stanhope@act.gov.au

---------------FURTHER INFORMATION -------

A coalition of lawyers, academics, policy workers and civil rights groups have written to the State Premiers and Attorneys-General outlining the serious discrepancies between what was promised at the COAG meeting and the draft legislation. You can view a copy of the letter here:

http://www.amcran.org/images/stories/ChiefMinLetter.pdf

An earlier report called "Laws for Insecurity? A Report on the Federal Government's Proposed Counter-Terrorism Measures" detailing various concerns regarding the Federal Government‚s proposals can be viewed from the AMCRAN website http://amcran.org. It highlights the lack of justification for the laws. Among other concerns emphasised are the substantial departures from key principles of a liberal democracy, the constitutional problems, and the lack of safeguards.

If you have any questions please email us at amcran@amcran.org.

Perhaps if Muslims didn't commit so many terrorist acts, or give so much support to terrorists, they wouldn't have to worry about these measures.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com

Perhaps if the Coalition of the Killing would stop their illegal an degrading wars and crimes against humanity then there would be no terrorists.

Let me tell you if our government continues on its high on the hill policy you'll soon be getting blown off the bus and the train by some loser who has been mistreated..

I hope if they do, they take out those who are responsible and not peace loving individuals who are opposed to the war and the war crimes committed by the killers running our government.

"Perhaps if the Coalition of the Killing would stop their illegal an degrading wars and crimes against humanity then there would be no terrorists. "

Because -- as we all know -- there was NO Islamic terrorism before George Bush was elected, right?

Muslim terrorists are murdering Buddhists in Thailand.

Is that because of George Bush?

Or is it because the Quran tells Muslims to kill non-believers?

What "Muslim" terrorist acts occured before western powers set about about taking Palestine off the Palestinians and giving it to Jews?

Why should Arabs tolerate American bases and troops on their soil against their wishes? We know they're not there for democracy. They back corrupt dictatorships who plunder the oil of the Middle Easts people.

Just because Aussies are a bunch of arselickers who let yanks use Depleted Uranium and anything else they fancy willy nilly on our (stolen) land doesn't mean everyone else should be obsequious arselickers too.

"Why should Arabs tolerate American bases and troops on their soil against their wishes? "

The Saudis and Kuwaiti were sure willing to tolerate them when they were shaking in their robes about getting their collective butts stomped by Saddam Hussein.

The truth is -- there isn't any single act of attrition that the West could make to placate the murderers who have co-opted Islam.

Not even the total destruction of Israel would make them happy.

And -- if these murderers think they will win this conflict -- they haven't read their history

" And -- if these murderers think they will win this conflict -- they haven't read their history"

That's what the majority were saying to Bush, Bliar and HoWARd all along. These stupid pricks will be long gone before this shit they started even begins to get sorted out. Why should they care anyway, it won't be their arses on the line.

You're right, we can't win this conflict. They're unified, we're divided. We'll be out of there sooner or later and all that we'll have achieved is a bloody mess.

What were we supposed to be fighting for anyway? Freedoms? Pppffffft! Even if you believe that they're long gone thanks to our great and wise leaders.

I'm with the other side. At least they are fighting for things I can identify with.

"
You're right, we can't win this conflict. They're unified, we're divided. "

Arabs have NEVER been united...they are victims of petty tribalism. Given the absence of an outside enemy, they return to killing each other, as they always have done. Even, as witnessed in today's Iraq, they continue to kill each other...Sunnis bloody Sunnis and Shia bloody shia- hardly peaceful united peoples.
The only divisiveness in the west, is by useful idiots who believe that arabs are united.

Regarding the above comments:

"in the aftermath of the illegal and degrading war on Iraq, at least 100,000 men women and children were killed, maimed and tortured. Because of the unlawful pre-emptive attack on their sovereign nation, many Muslim were "illegally" detained without having any regard for the "International Law". This is a most conservative estimate, because of secrecy; we don't know how many were detained, tortured or killed. Some estimates would be a lot higher than 100,000."

If you consider those figures as a percentage of the overall Australian population, it would translate to occupation of a sovereign nation state. Considering they'd ultimately get angry about that then this is a bad statistic considering the fuss that's being made over the war criminal john HoWARd's new anti-liberty laws and considering victims in Iraq and Afhganistan for that matter would ultimately be let go if they survived - innocent, just like in an unfortunate pre-emptive attack in conventional crime.

"Australian community impact: This opens a huge door for fear and the terror of reprisal by the people who were attacked on the people who did attack the sovereign nation states -- it is more likely that our laws will become restrictive because of the fear of reprisal and everyone will become suspicious of each other!

It does appear "more likely" that the People who were attacked, would react and blame the people who did attack including Muslims, Buddhists, Methodists, Jews or Christians those who were attacked will retaliate with forthcoming reprisal attacks on the West and this seems to be ignored quite a bit.

As such, perhaps the innocent majority who are being disadvantaged, should take the initiative and turn their anger towards the 'Coalition of the Killing' and the 'terrorist minority' amidst their region, rather than 'cry victim' and aim their anger at a softer targets like the 'community at large' to get rid of the problem our government 'created for the community'. Which has completely failed to be dealt with.

This photo sums it up beautifully.

Thank you for your time.

Ps) Don't forget the shoes for Simon and go fuck yourself for professor rat....

Opps!

This photo sums it up beautifully.

Thank you for your time.

Ps) Don't forget the shoes for Simon and go fuck yourself for professor rat....

Mmmmmm..... original, or extra crispy

Let’s see.

What happens if a democratic government ignores the wishes of the people?

First the government tells the people that they are ignorant, on the basis that the government has hard secret evidence and all the intelligence,

They have proof, but can't show it, for secret reasons.

it makes the opposition look stupid, because they've got nothing.

The Government ask for trust, demands patience and act as if there is only one thing to do, and immediately pursue pre-emptive strikes to save our skins from WMD and terrorists.

Which was really the best thing to do

if the intention was to profit financially from the arrangement, we win, free trade, wars great for manufacturing and raw material sales, 2 out of three’s great for economies…lovely!. What do you think?

it was either that or....

A Western example of benevolent behaviour.

Is that what Jesus would have done? I wonder, but not for long.

As a result of the deceptions and lies no word coming from official sources can now be trusted.

Saddam loyalists, Al Qeader, Sunnis and Shiites and all Muslims opposed to western occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan are now Christian/western/Jewish enemies and they want to kill us.

Can’t say I blame them, it’s a reasonable attitude seen from their side.

Muslim Perception

Westerners are represented by our democratic governments, who listen to public demands and act in the best interest of the people.
This is the advertised advantage of democracy, each of us votes, therefore, reflecting recent events, we have all told our government to invade kill and destroy Muslim nations.

We the people of our democratic nations want to kill Muslims.

Some European countries stayed out of the coalition, they were unwilling to ride roughshod over the wishes of their people and stayed away from middle eastern take overs.

Muslims say,

If we did not want our government to do this criminal act then they would have to listen and obey the wishes of the people, no excuses as in a democracy the people rule the government, one vote for all.

Is that not the way democratization advertises the product?

Of course and Muslims are not fools.

In reality 80% of the people were ignored in America, GB and Australia, the ignorant people marched in demonstrations and wrote letters, they demanded representation but got none.

Now the democratic Despotic Regimes of the Willing Nations have bought in anti terror laws to defend the free people of the west, and you believe these new powers are directed against Muslims.

You ignorant fool,
You dummed down nana’s,
These laws are directed against YOU.

The 80% who will be bought with tax cuts or guarantees of stable interest rates or raised child allowances while the economies is strong enough to give.

But what happens to the calm of of society when the local economy goes broke?

What happens when we are joint partners in continued middle eastern conflict,

What happens when conscription comes in?

when our governments fiscal policy depends upon AId from US donations.

What are you going to do Then?

Demonstrate?

Oh pity about that they arrested and detained your activists,

No organisers or organisations for you!

Write a letter?

To the editor of a Newscorp paper, or to a right wing labour or liberal politician,

waste of paper.

Yeah go Girl!

Slap their wrists & bottoms.

Or Throw shoes?

Decorating the wires before Christmas makes more sense than chopping down trees for Jesus.

I don’t have anything against democracy, that’s why I am angry, because what’s on offer is only to support a police state.

These laws are directed against any dissent, any opposition any free speech and every person, these laws are against the freedoms we once had that stopped our country from invading others for money.

Look what happened.

What "Muslim" terrorist acts occured before western powers set about about taking Palestine off the Palestinians and giving it to Jews?

Islamic crusades against non-combatants date back to Mohammed beheading several of them thousands of years ago. It's convenient for you to echo Arab despots by suggesting it's all Israel's (and by extension America) fault, however history and the facts simply aren't on your side.

You make the mistake of trying to identify the root cause of Islamist terrorism through Western values. The reality is however that no amount of foreign aid to the Palestinian people nor any resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict, will actually pacify these current and potential terrorist killers. Even if (God forbid) Israel were completely obliterated (the stated goal of much of the Muslim world), brutal Islamic terror would continue until the entire non-Islamic world is under their control. Don't kid yourself otherwise, and that doesn't include Muslim on Muslim violence, which is far more prevalent, yet widely under-reported.