David Jull (Fadden, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, I present the committee’s report entitled Review of the re-listing of Ansar al-Sunna, JeM, LeJ, EIJ, IAA, AAA and IMU as terrorist organisations.

Ordered that the report be made a parliamentary paper.

by leave—I present the report of the Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security on a review of the re-listing of seven terrorist organisations. The committee first considered the listing of these organisations in 2005. The inquiry was advertised in the Australian newspaper on 18 April 2007 and information regarding the inquiry was then placed on the committee’s website. No submissions were received from the public. In the absence of submissions and, given that these are second re-listings of organisations which did not raise controversial issues, the committee resolved to assess the merits of the re-listings on the papers without holding a hearing.

The seven organisations covered by this review are diverse in their geographical location, ranging from the EIJ, which began in Egypt, to organisations that began in the Yemen, Lebanon, Pakistan, Iraq and Uzbekistan. The EIJ, members of which have been dispersed from Egypt, became central to the development al-Qaeda through the role of Ayman al-Zawahiri. To some extent its existence is not easily separable from that of al-Qaeda. As the report notes—quoting the US state department—there have been:

... no activities in Egypt after 1993 and no international acts after the disrupted attack in 1998.

However, Janes believes that the EIJ leader—al-Zawahiri—‘remains a potent symbol of resistance for thousands of sympathisers across the world’ and that ‘numerous cells remain at large’. Ansar al-Sunna is active in Iraq as part of the insurgency there. Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Jaish-e-Mohammad are both part of the dispute over the IAK, or Indian administered Kashmir. Jaish-e-Mohammad is described as active, well resourced, well trained and motivated.

Many of the regional organisations are, despite splintering and disagreements, connected. Asbat al-Ansar operates in southern Lebanon but has begun to support the insurgency in Iraq. The Islamic Army of Aden seeks the overthrow of the local government and the establishment of an Islamic state, and the release of prisoners from Yemeni jails. However, the statement of reason attributes little activity to it in recent times and, in 2003, its leader cooperated with authorities and received a presidential pardon. Nevertheless, many of these organisations with their separate objectives appear to have developed links. The committee concluded:

... all of these organisations have been localised groups growing out of specific grievances or particular conflicts. For most, it has been the advent of the war on terrorism that has extended their reach and their objectives – to the establishment of a regional caliphate, to providing fighters into other fields of battle, to cross funding through the al-Qa’ida network. Individual conflicts are now seen as part of a larger conflict and they appear to feed on and re-enforce each other, bringing experience and skill learned in one place to other disputes. And, with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the focus has broadened from opposition to local ‘apostate’ governments to a larger enemy in the West.

The committee concluded that, if this is the case, proscription could play only a limited role and that other approaches, such as the settlement of longstanding disputes, might more effectively undermine support for the violence that has become part of these disputes. Nevertheless, each organisation met the definition of a terrorist organisation in the Criminal Code. Therefore, the committee concluded, on the basis of the statement of reason and other open source information, that it would not recommend disallowance of any of the organisations.

In conclusion, I would like to thank members of the committee who continue to undertake their duties in a bipartisan fashion and who recognise the need to put the national interest and effective parliamentary scrutiny of highly sensitive matters before any partisan political interests. The work of the committee continually presents the members with the challenge of reconciling the demands of national security with parliamentary and public scrutiny. May I also extend my thanks to the secretariat of the committee for their continued hard work. I recommend the report to the House.

See this speech in context