Anthony Byrne (Holt, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I certainly echo the speech that has been given by the Chair of the Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. I am happy to rise as deputy chair of the same committee to speak on this particular report. With respect to the tabling of this report, the Review of the re-listing of Ansar al-Sunna, JeM, LeJ, EIJ, IAA, AAA and IMU as terrorist organisations, I will not go into the reasons why they have been relisted—the chair has basically done that. But it is interesting that the proscription of these organisations is being conducted in an environment where the committee is currently conducting a full review of the operations, effectiveness and implications of proscription powers, and we expect to report as a committee on this matter later in the year. A number of approaches to the proscription process are being examined in the course of this review and it is hoped that procedures may be refined as a result.

In particular, an issue that concerns the committee, and that has concerned the committee on numerous occasions with respect to the numerous reports that it has tabled on the proscription of organisations, is the criteria that have been basically stipulated by ASIO to select an organisation for listing. Those criteria are: engagement in terrorism, ideology and links to other terrorist groups or networks, links to Australia, threats to Australian interests, proscription by the UN or by like-minded countries and engagement in peace and mediation processes. This has been an issue that the committee has dealt with, as the chair of the committee knows, on several occasions—and not to the satisfaction of the committee, because as a committee we believe that these benchmark criteria have not been consistently addressed by ASIO or the Attorney-General’s Department in its statement of reasons.

When you proscribe an organisation it can affect a very large number of people. We had the recent listing of the PKK, for example, where a number of Australian citizens may be affected. There may be other diasporas that are affected by future proscriptions. Therefore, one would imagine, notwithstanding the fact that our committee receives classified briefings and holds private hearings about some of the reasons why some of these organisations need to be listed, there needs to be very clearly defined benchmarks that are adhered to when the public examines the reasons why an organisation is being listed. If the committee has had some level of difficulty with some of the proscriptions in addressing those benchmark criteria, when a listing comes before the committee that may affect a very large number of Australian citizens, it is absolutely imperative that we can provide a public justification as to why the organisation needs to be listed.

The other thing I would mention with respect to that is the need for community consultation. As the chair knows, on numerous occasions, on virtually every report, we have been given assurances that the Attorney-General’s Department is developing a response to the committee’s recommendation on community consultation. Not only has this not happened but, as I understand it, the level of communication with the public has been diminished by the removal of the statement of reasons from the Attorney-General’s media release and website. It remains again the committee’s view that it would be most beneficial were a community information program to occur prior to the listing of the organisation under the Criminal Code. The question will be addressed more fully in the current review of the proscription power. But it is my belief and the belief of the committee that that is absolutely essential—and also in relation to after the proscription has occurred. When an organisation is proscribed, particularly if it may affect a very large number of Australians, people from those communities affected need to be fully informed. On that basis, I commend the report to the House.

See this speech in context