Secret police state laws revealed
BY MARGARET ALLUM
SYDNEY — The Olympic Games to be held in September have given the New South Wales Labor government the opportunity to quietly introduce legislation that gives police and security officers harsh "police state" powers for the period of the games. The repressive laws have prompted activists and law researchers to produce a pamphlet about activists' rights to protest.
The Olympic Arrangements Act 2000 will be in force for the eight months to the end of December. Some provisions will be up for review only in 2002, when it is unlikely that they will be repealed.
"Move on" additions in 1998 to the Summary Offences Act 1988 gave police more powers to disperse people in public places. However, they had to follow procedures, including self-identification as police officers, warning that failure to comply with an order to disperse was an offence and that a reason for the direction to move had to be stated. Police could use these powers if, in their opinion, someone was "obstructing, harassing or intimidating" others or was "causing or likely to cause" fear.
Under the new regulations covering the Olympic sites at Homebush Bay and the Sydney Harbour foreshores, police and "authorised officers" have been given the power to use "reasonable force" to remove anyone that they consider is causing "annoyance", "inconvenience" or is using offensive language. There is no need for to give a reason for the request to move on. Police or authorised officers do not need to identify themselves unless requested to.
According to University of Western Sydney law lecturer Michael Head, writing in the June Alternative Law Journal, around 30,000 private security guards and tens of thousands of Olympic Co-ordination Authority (OCA) authorised personnel will join 4000 military personnel, thousands of state police, as well as security and intelligence agents from other countries, including the US and Israel.
Amanda Cornwall, senior policy officer at the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) in Sydney, told 91×ÔÅÄÂÛ̳ Weekly that the powers given to the "authorised officers" were the most worrying aspect of the new laws. She explained that the Homebush Bay Operations Regulation 1999 and the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority Regulation 1999 give broad powers to police officers, rangers and people authorised by the OCA.
Authorised officers do not need specific qualifications or training before being given the right to use force. Under the Homebush Bay regulations, which cover the sports grounds, there is not even a requirement for the authorised officer to first direct the person to leave the area before removing them. The Olympic Arrangements Act allows cabinet to make areas outside the Homebush Bay area subject to the Homebush Bay laws.
The University of Technology, Sydney (UTS) Community Law and Legal Research Centre (CLLRC) states that the Olympic Arrangements Act, passed in April, could be used to cover areas in much of Sydney, particularly the Olympic "live" sites where big screens will show Olympic events (such as Circular Quay, the Domain, Tumbalong Park, Martin Place, Pyrmont Bay Park, Darling Island, Belmore Park).
In a February PIAC briefing paper, Cornwall pointed out that under the Homebush Bay Operations Regulation legislation, "it is conceivable that an authorised person or a police officer could decide to remove a spectator from a part of the sports ground for using indecent language. They would not need to first request the person to leave but could use reasonable force to remove them ... if a spectator were to resist being removed they could then be charged with the offence of resisting or obstructing an enforcement officer, threatening, intimidating or assaulting an enforcement officer or assaulting police in the execution of his or her duties — in addition to the charge of using indecent language."
It is the use of these laws and regulations against those wishing to use the international spotlight attracted by the Olympics to protest that particularly concerns the CLLRC. Louise Boon Kuo, civil rights campaigner Tim Anderson and others are producing the Olympic Protest pamphlet, Boon Kuo told 91×ÔÅÄÂÛ̳ Weekly, to inform protesters of their rights during the games period and beyond.
Drawing on previous work done for the Activist Rights Handbook (1993) and the Youth Street Rights pamphlet (1998), the centre wants to prepare anyone who may want to protest against what have been dubbed the "corporate Olympics". Boon Kuo said that instead of focussing on what is outlawed, the centre's approach is to focus on what rights activists have, and how these can be exercised.
The context of a political action can affect the outcome for the activists, she explained. How police or security personnel quell social unrest, even peaceful protest, can vary depending on how large a demonstration is, how well-prepared and organised protesters are and whether the media or independent witnesses are present. Tactics employed by protesters can either aggravate or lessen state intervention, she added.
In November 1980, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights came into force in Australia. Boon Kuo says that this is the framework for the right to protest that will be used in the pamphlet. Australia, unlike most countries, does not have a bill of rights, Boon Kuo noted, and rights have generally been interpreted as what has not been prohibited or regulated by the state. She said the pamphlet will be focussing on what can be done, rather that what is prohibited. This is a "rights-based approach", according to Boon Kuo.
Recent events in Sydney, such as the Reclaim the Streets protest, have been used as training for police to deal with civil unrest (including the use of capsicum spray and horses) during the Olympics period, Boon Kuo said.
Police have wide discretionary powers to apply laws relating to public order policing, Boon Kuo said. The St Patrick's Day parade was less likely to experience repression by police than a gathering such as Reclaim the Streets, even if the behaviour of those attending both marches is similar.
"Policing Public Safety", a report released by NSW ombudsman Bruce Barbour, tabled in parliament on June 29, revealed how the "move on" powers given to NSW police in the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Police and Public Safety) Act 1998 and anti-knife laws have been used disproportionately against young people and Aboriginal people.
Boon Kuo said those groups targeted by police usually occupy public space to a greater degree because they cannot afford to use, or are made unwelcome, in private space.
The abuse by police of their existing powers does not bode well for the poor, the young, indigenous people and political activists when the more draconian Olympic-related laws are enforced.
The UTS Community Law and Legal Research Centre needs financial assistance to produce 10,000 copies of the Olympic Protest pamphlet. Contact Louise Boon Kuo or Tim Anderson on (02) 9514 2915.