Putting police above the law
Occasionally I am forced to express my disappointment at the Gallop Government’s willingness to trample civil rights in the name of “community safety” — a fluffy code term for old-fashioned Laura Norder tubthumping.
The threat of a terrorist attack provides a great opportunity for this kind of posturing, and apart from rushing to agree with whatever draconian proposal John Howard puts forward, the Premier recently boasted that he “would provide Western Australian police with the toughest powers in the nation to combat terrorist activities.”
He was talking about the Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Bill 2005, which is currently before the WA parliament. If passed, the bill would give police outrageous powers to search people, places and vehicles, without judicial oversight.
The Bill creates a new type of Warrant called a Commissioner’s warrant, which, among other things, will give the police power to:
-
control anybody’s movement in the designated area (s 11);
-
collect the personal details of people, even if they are not a suspect or a witness to any crime (s 12); and
-
search any person (s 13), or their vehicle (s 14) or home (s 15), on the basis that they have been in the area covered by the warrant.
These powers can be exercised irrespective of whether there is any reason to believe the people affected are involved in any criminal activity, let alone terrorism. They may be exercised by non-police officers in certain circumstances (sch 1 cl 2), and the use of force is authorised (sch 1 cl 3).
Given appropriate safeguards, none of these provisions would provide significant cause for concern. If there is a real threat of an imminent terrorist attack, then giving the police the power to move people out of an area or to search people seems reasonable.
The legislation seems to include such safeguards. Details of Commissioner’s warrants must be given to the Minister for Police, who must eventually report to Parliament; however, this is a reporting requirement that comes too late to effectively protect civil rights, and it’s hard to imagine such a report being tendered without being spun to protect the Government.
More importantly, the warrants appear to require judicial approval — but they don’t. According to s 7(3)(1):
The Commissioner must not issue such a warrant without the prior approval of a judge but, if there is an urgent need to issue it and a judge cannot be contacted to request approval, may issue it without such approval.
A warrant issued without judicial approval will lapse after 24 hours (s 7(4)(b)), but that’s quite a long time within which the police may give themselves extraordinary powers without independent oversight — and it’s a meaningless time limit when those provisions are read in conjunction with s 9(3):
[T]he Commissioner may issue a further warrant that has effect immediately a previously issued warrant ceases to have effect.
This opens the possibility for an over-eager Commissioner or authorised officer to issue a warrant in circumstances that the legislation did not intend them to do so. You might think that is unlikely (it probably is) but where police are given powers they will inevitably push the boundaries to use them as widely as possible.
Moreover, while we might have confidence in the current leadership, it is inevitable that the police will go through periods of… shall we say, dubious ethical conduct. That is when these powers may be overturned.
If that happens, it would be nice to think that a citizen whose rights were trampled would have some recourse against the police. But they won’t — s 20(1) makes sure of that:
Neither a Commissioner’s warrant nor a judge’s approval of such a warrant can be appealed against, reviewed, quashed, challenged, or called in question, before or by any person acting judicially or a court or tribunal on any account or by any means.
The only body that may question the warrant, even if it was issued in flagrant breach of the legislative guidelines, is the Corruption and Crime Commission. There is no reason to exclude other bodies from considering the legality of a Commissioner’s warrant. The public has a right to protect its rights by taking things to court — especially if the breach they are complaining about was caused by dodging judicial oversight in the first place.
By limiting the public’s recourse to the courts to challenge dubious warrants, the Bill effectively encourages the police to issue warrants that are on the shady side, and perhaps to flexibly interpret the phrase “a judge cannot be contacted”.
I heard on the radio (but, alas, can’t find the story online here it is) that Coalition members of the Legislative Council have raised concerns about this last aspect of the legislation, and that Opposition Leader Matt Birney supports them. They are rightly concerned that s 20(1) “effectively puts the police above the law”.
Instead of taking on board the suggestion that the Bill’s safeguards be improved, Geoff Gallop responded in accordance with the “community safety” propaganda rules — by accusing the Opposition of being soft on terrorists.
To Gallop, this is just another tough-on-crime pissing contest — and he’s not even worried that it’s our civil liberties he’s pissing on.
Unfortunately, if Gallop had done nothing re enacting anti-terrorism legilation, then Howard, Birney, Mooner Murray , Liam “Liberal Lover” Bartlett and of course Paul Armstrong - editor of the Herdsman Lake sub-branch of the Liberal -erm West Australian, and their brain-dead listeners/readers would be shouting from the rooftops that the Govt supports terrorists.
PLus, if someone DARES criticises these laws then they will immediately be classed a “Terrorist Sympathiser”
It’s a pity that the ALP has to play copycat and one-upmanship to Canberra, but it is a case of Damned if you do, Damned if you don’t.
You’d think the Labor MPs and policy wonks who come up with “genius” legislation like this would consider what could be done with it if the ALP wasn’t in power… and given the history of the Labor Party, its concerning to say the least to consider what they could do with it when in power (strike busting comes to mind)…
Well the obvious has been pointed out – S.E. Asia’s most wanted “terrorist” Noordin Mohammed Top is now accusing Howard and Downer of taking Australia in the wrong direction, so we are all targets now. Thank you Mr. Howard and Mr. Downer.
Most aware Australians knew this would happen. It’s not surprising at all. Has our government protected us? All we can expect now is a terrorist attack by a group that wants to make a point that the coalition hasn’t acted in our best interest - or theirs either. Apart from the privileged, can we expect any person who “appears” suspicious to have a fair trial?
The great divide is back again. Mr. Howard must have been distressed in 1976 when the White Australia Policy was abolished. He can indemnify this now with our new anti-terrorism legislation.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200511/s1509817.htm
It seems Dr Karl is driving the legislation.
The Police Commissioner has spoken out against the Liberal Party decision.
Commissioner Karl O’Callaghan says allowing suspects to seek an injunction will prevent police from responding to a terrorist threat.
“The check and balance is there,” he said.
“If people feel aggrieved by this there is the potential for them to go to the CCC for review.
“But when there is an operation in progress, to frustrate a police inquiry has the potential to bring it to a complete halt. And I don’t think the public in Western Australia can afford that.”
aka, They can’t be stuffed getting their facts straight.
This is just more legistlation for what is probably one of the most legislated countries in the world. Bottom line is that the government is there to provide a standard of life for us which keeps us happy, giving the police even more rights is bound to only cause us even more stress. Why is is that people in other countries where corruption is rife seem to lead happier lives then ourselves?
One more time… We need a constitutional Bill of Rights for Australia. The ACT has a statutory Bill of Rights, which at the end of the day, government need not respect. This is also the flavour that Steven Ciobo is advocating. A statutory Bill of Rights simply won’t reign in an abusive government.
What about the ridiculous “move on” laws? I personally know 3 people who have been arrested under this law (myself being one of them). It’s quite ridiculous for the police to be able to tell you were on a public footpath you can and can not stand. If the place you are standing happens to be where you agreed to meet someone then what are you supposed to do?
After keeping quite about many things for years we will throw our hat in. Many Muslims agree with sending troops to overseas countries to try to break up the terrorists before they get here. Look what happend with Hitler because everybody stood back and did NOTHING.
John Howard made it one of his first jobs when he was elected years ago to arrange self regulation of live exporters and those who committ the most dreadful crimes upon animals.We think both Gods have had enough of Animal cruetly and we are only reeping what we Sow. When you look at it like that YEH it is wrong for a police to try to protect us because after all we are ALL guilty so there by all equals.> Even the terrorists. yes madam that means you too sitting at home hanging nappies on the line and chatting over coffee with the neighbours. IF WE DO NOTHING WE ARE GUILLTY OF DOING NOTHING ABOUT IT.
Karama is coming for us all and it is because of Animal cruelty world wide. Howard well knows this as he is reasponsible for much of it so you can bet your bottom dollar HE beleives in Karma.
Thats why he is so scared for this country but the poor miserable man who just does what he is told by PACKER Live Exporter media gaint
World wide until we start treating animals with respect the world will not be a nice place.
Children learn from their parents just like the terrorists children do. Make no mistake these people hate us and have done so for many years. Their one goal is to destroy the western World> First with selling their drugs to our kids so we have no defence and second by any means they can.
When some of the other counries do their bit to stop drugs being brought into our counrty you all scream..
Australia WILL be attacked sooner or later. Perhaps people would perfer we had no laws in preperation for when that time comes.
A good court case is either won or lost before you walk into court by the preperation done . As for too many powers well it might be handy if the Army worked more closley with the Federal Police.
They have their own lock ups and that way nobody could just say the police are only incharge.
So for the young man who was concerned about meeting his buddy on the street corner we can only suggest perhaps you are hanging about in the wrong part of town
Try another Corner or perhaps even try changing Company.
Police do not just grab people for nothing. There is such a thing called attitude and respect.
While we still have her Australia is our counrty and we should protect her in everyway we can. Crime has trippled since many of these people came., Stabbings muders etc.
Dont quote me just read the satistics of court appearences in this country. Check out the funds gone on legal aid in the last twenty years or so to this lot.
Hardley fair on our kids when they get themselves into trouble.
We also say one day there will be a Cow Karma day> Thats the day that all the Animals return in the bodies full of poison and hate for the Australian People who stood back and did NOTHING to stop the Unmercfiful and unnessary cruelty to Animals in live exports AND Intensive farming.
Stop worrying about too many laws and start worry about too much power within the media gaints of this country.
Thats where there IS too much power and BLATENT conflict of interest.
Start your own neighhood watch type groups to keep a look out accross the waters Australia wide because trust me ARE comming. Call it the Anti Howard watch for coppers club if you like but get out on the streets and look about a bit while the coppers are all trying to protect your familys.
Muslims are basically nice people however if WE dont treat THEM with respect THEY will be driven to the more extream. so GO TO THE MOSQUES and ask> How can we work together?
Would your family like to come to our familys place for dinner? etc?
If everybody did that then we would be a LOT safter.
That does not mean that we should not have very strick powers at the same time. There are thousands of terriorists fighting for the honour to b;low themselves and Western countries up , what DO you want our coppers to do if they suspect somebody> Give them a loly pop?
The frightening public face of the lunatic animal welfare fringe.
By the way, I recently heard that tinfoil hats actually make it EASEEAR for the feds to reed ur braynewaves!!!!1!!1101!