BY ALISON DELLIT
In a month or so, federal cabinet will introduce laws into parliament which will criminalise political dissent and provide Australia's secret police services with more powers to harass protesters.
Cabinet is proposing to allow the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation to "coerce" information out of people. ASIO will be permitted to interrogate "suspects" for 48 hours without allowing contact with the outside world — not even to gain legal advice.
Prime Minister John Howard is proposing that a new "terrorism" offence be created, ostensibly to punish those who blow up buildings and kill hundreds of people. But it is already illegal to kill or torture people, blow up buildings and hijack aircraft.
The new bill will not just target people who do these things. "An act committed for a political, religious or ideological purpose designed to intimidate the public with regards to its security and intended to cause serious damage to persons, property or infrastructure" will also be defined as "terrorism". The offence will carry a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.
Accusations of causing "serious damage" are often directed towards protest organisers. After September 11, 2000, Crown Casino accused anti-World Economic Forum protesters of causing "serious damage" to its buildings by painting political graffiti on them. Organisers of pro-free education occupations at the Australian National University in 1994, and Melbourne University in 1997, faced similar accusations.
It is unlikely, given the high level of public support for free speech, that protesters could be successfully prosecuted for "terrorism". However, the legislation will grant secret police investigating "terrorism" extraordinary powers to intimidate activists, even if no charges are ever laid.
A warrant allowing 48 hours of incommunicado detention can be applied for by the director general of security — who is head of ASIO, the Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS) and the Defence Signals Directorate (DSD) — and issued by a member of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The AAT is a non-judicial, government-appointed body. The warrant application would have to be approved by the attorney general.
To be taken into custody, a person will not have to be suspected of "terrorism", but simply suspected of knowing relevant information. Once taken in for questioning, to refuse to answer questions becomes an offence, punishable by two years' imprisonment. Journalists, doctors and lawyers will not have immunity.
ASIO and the DSD already have significant powers. If someone is suspected of "activities prejudicial to national security", ASIO has the power, under warrant, to bug them or their telephone, attach a tracking device to them or their property, search their computer or their premises and do "any thing necessary to conceal the fact that any thing has been done under the warrant".
Members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) are also authorised to bug the telephones of people suspected of certain offences. Howard is proposing to add the new "terrorism" offence to the list of offences.
ASIO, ASIS and DSD officers already have limited immunity from prosecution for illegal acts carried out while "doing their job". AFP officers also have immunity from some state and territory laws. It is an offence, punishable by one year of imprisonment, to reveal the identity or address of an ASIO, ASIS or DSD agent.
The government intends to hold a national summit this year to discuss fighting terrorism and "people smuggling". This is also likely to strengthen the powers of the AFP when dealing with state police forces.
Even before the legislation has been passed, the government has used the excuse of "fighting terrorism" to introduce new repressive regulations and to increase political surveillance. On October 8 and 9, foreign affairs minister Alexander Downer signed into law regulations allowing the freezing of any assets suspected of being used by "terrorist organisations".
The scheduled list of "terrorists" was taken from the United Nations. It includes the Basque group ETA, the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the National Liberation Army (ELN) of Colombia and many groups involved in supporting the Palestinians' struggle against Israeli occupation, including Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and Hezbollah.
On December 21, Attorney General Daryl Williams explained to the media that the government had known for some time that there were Australians who "sympathise with or support terrorist organisations overseas" and all reports of "people in that situation" were being "thoroughly investigated".
Anecdotal evidence suggests that such "investigations" have involved ASIO raids on the houses of Palestinian, Tamil and Colombian activists, most of whom are too afraid of reprisals to speak out publicly.
Many of the groups the government (and the United Nations) slanders as "terrorists" are fighting military repression of their national culture. The PKK, for example, is demanding rights as basic as the freedom to speak Kurdish and learn about Kurdish culture in Turkey.
Some of the biggest terrorists in the world — responsible for the deaths of 6000 children a month in Iraq — are not on the list because they are First World governments.
The US and Australian governments' definition of "terrorism", echoed by the capitalist media, is political: a terrorist is what you call those who use violence to pursue political aims you disagree with.
That is why the creation of a "terrorism" offence should be opposed. Creation of a terrorism offence implies that politically motivated crimes should get harsher penalties than those committed for profit.
If the results for activists weren't so severe, the Howard government's attempts to convince the public of the need for increased security powers would be farcical. On Christmas Eve, Williams held a solemn press conference, telling hundreds of journalists that Australia was the subject of a potential terrorist threat, but was "not specific to any particular type of threat or any particular location". He urged Australians to "remain vigilant". Explaining that "security" had been "heightened", he declined to reveal how.
On January 7, Williams held another press conference and explained that the "threat" had passed — but conceded that the government had received "no confirmation of the accuracy of the initial information".
Other Williams' press conferences have been called as a result of US claims that Australia may be one of 70 countries with resident Osama bin Laden sympathisers and to disclose that a suspected terrorist arrested in India had once studied in Australia. Despite Williams' warning that the "India incident" showed how vulnerable Australia was, Australian authorities did not even interview the man.
The media have eagerly lapped-up Williams' grandstanding. The ABC's Linda Mottram described one press conference as "casting a veil of secrecy" — an unusual purpose for speaking to the media. The result has been a growing sense of unease among many Australians, a mood vital for the government to convince the population that the new ASIO powers and "terrorism" offence are necessary.
The bill does have opponents. Activist groups such as the Network Opposing War and Racism groups and Act Now to Stop War and Racism have demanded no attacks on civil liberties. In Victoria, a new group called the Human Rights Alliance has called a public meeting to oppose the proposed bill. The Australian Arabic Council has also spoken out against the planned legislation, pointing out that security services are already targeting Arab communities. The Socialist Alliance has also condemned the changes and pledged to fight their passage.
The Democrats and the Australian Greens have indicated that they will not support giving ASIO powers of detention under the conditions described by the government. In order to pass the bill in the Senate, the government needs the support of the ALP.
Unfortunately, the ALP has welcomed the "general thrust" of the changes and confirmed that it will support the creation of a "terrorism" offence. However, the party does not yet have a position on the increased ASIO powers and has indicated that it will send the whole bill to a parliamentary committee for review.
According to shadow home affairs minister John Faulkner, such a parliamentary inquiry can canvass the views of "law enforcement agencies, ASIO, legal experts and the community".
From 91×ÔÅÄÂÛ̳ Weekly, January 23, 2002.
Visit the