BY ALISON DELLIT
The Greens and the Democrats oppose the “anti-terrorism” legislation
and will vote against it in the Senate. Attorney-General Daryl Williams
has been under considerable criticism within the Liberal Party for the
botching of the legislation, and the government will itself support some
amendments. The ALP has also said it will amend the bills.
But while both major parties are making a lot of noise about amending
the bills to safeguard civil liberties, the amendments discussed so far
will leave the legislation substantially intact.
The amendments under discussion in both major parties up to May 19 were:
-
Tightening the definition of terrorism. The ALP wants to add “the use of
violence to intimidate the government”. The Coalition-controlled Senate
committee's suggestion was similar, but didn't include the word violent.
The ALP proposal will reduce, but not eliminate, the number of protests
classified as “terrorist acts”.
-
Removing the proscription power. The Coalition is still divided on this
issue: Williams has proposed retaining it, but giving the power to Parliament
instead of himself. Leaks from the Liberal Party room, however, indicate
many Coalition MPs want to remove it altogether. The ALP wants to abolish
it, and replace it with an offence of supporting a “terrorist organisation”
which would be prosecuted through the courts with the court deciding whether
the organisation in question fitted the bill.
-
Abandoning “strict liability”. This is supported by everyone in the Coalition
party room except Williams, and by the ALP.
-
Altering the treason definition to protect aid agencies is an ALP proposal
supported by at least some Coalition MPs.
-
The ALP also wants to force the police to get an intercept warrant before
accessing private email.
From Green Left Weekly, May 22, 2002.
Visit the Green Left Weekly
home page.
