Arch Bevis (Brisbane, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to 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 Al-Qa’ida (AQ), Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) and Al-Qa’ida in the lands of Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) as terrorist organisations under the Criminal Code Act 1995.

Ordered that the report be made a parliamentary paper.

Al-Qaeda and Jemaah Islamiyah were originally listed on 21 and 27 October 2002 and relisted on 31 August 2004 with effect on 1 September 2004. The committee first considered the listing of al-Qaeda and Jemaah Islamiyah in 2004 with the committee’s role in the Criminal Code procedure having been established. Both organisations were relisted on 4 September 2006, and the committee subsequently reviewed the relisting, reporting to parliament in October 2006.

Al-Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb was originally listed under the name Salafist Group for Call and Combat, the GSPC, in 2002 following their listing by the United Nations Security Council. The committee first considered the listing of the GSPC in 2004 after the committee’s role in the criminal procedures had been established. The GSPC was relisted on 5 November 2004 and again on 1 November 2006. The regulations were signed by the Governor-General on 7 August 2008. They were then tabled in the House of Representatives and the Senate on 26 August. The disallowance period of 15 sitting days for the committee’s review of the listing began from the date of the tabling. Therefore, the committee has sought to have this report before the parliament today, 13 October 2008.

Notice of the inquiry was placed on the committee’s website. No submissions were received from the public. Representatives of the Attorney-General’s Department and ASIO attended private hearings on these matters. The committee heard evidence that each of these three organisations continue to engage in, and offer support for, terrorist acts. The assessed likelihood that Al-Qaeda has shifted some of its focus from Iraq to Afghanistan makes it likely that Australian troops in Afghanistan confront armed forces linked to Al-Qaeda.

Although there have been no anti-Western attacks committed by Jemaah Islamiyah in South-East Asia since the last relisting, the committee heard that within Indonesia it is reported that JI has engaged in terrorist activities, including assassinations and bombings. Al-Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb’s most significant attack on Western interests was the 11 December 2007 suicide bombing attack on the UN office in Algiers, which killed 17 people. This constituted the worst attack on the United Nations since the bombing of the UN headquarters in Iraq in 2003. In view of this and the other matters contained in the report that I have just tabled, the committee does not recommend to the parliament that the regulations made to proscribe these three organisations be disallowed.

In conclusion, I take this opportunity to thank fellow members of the committee, who have worked as they have in previous parliaments in a constructive and bipartisan manner, and the secretariat: Mr Robert Little, Ms Philippa Davies and Mrs Donna Quintus-Bosz for their support of our important work. I commend the report to the House.

Philip Ruddock (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I first endorse the comments of the member for Brisbane about the way in which the Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security has worked. I commend him on his leadership of the committee. I thank Robert Little and his staff for the professional role that they undertake in relation to these matters.

I want to highlight this report on the relisting of these terrorist organisations. It is a very important report because the issues which it deals with are often matters that people overlook when there have not been terrorist incidents that immediately impact upon them and their lives. This report does put into the public arena material that is often absent. It is well researched and it is material that I think is useful for the public to be aware of.

The Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security has a very special role. It reviews regulations specifying organisations as terrorist organisations. In this case we are dealing with al-Qaeda, Jemaah Islamiyah and al-Qaeda in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb. This review of the relisting of these organisations affirms that relisting should occur. As the chair has outlined, these organisations were first listed in 2002 and then in August 2004.

There was an effort to see whether there are people with views contrary. They were not seen. The committee was able to see contemporary material which reaffirms the importance of relisting, particularly al-Qaeda and Jemaah Islamiyah, as terrorist organisations. The report does outline the number of acts directly attributable to al-Qaeda through to the last in July 2005, where they assisted in the training of those involved in attacks on London’s transport system, which killed 56 people, including one Australian. You see outlined in the report material that comes directly from Osama bin Laden and his deputy, al-Zawahari. It outlines their thinking in relation to the way in which their organisation should continue to operate.

When you look at the quotes from the Middle East Quarterly, it says that since January 2005 some 40 different organisations in countries that include Afghanistan, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Morocco, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Yemen have announced their formation and pledged allegiance to bin Laden and al-Qaeda and their strategic objectives. The report includes evidence from ASIO that al-Qaeda’s popularity is not diminishing. While there is no information specifically linking it to Australia, the report outlines the threat to Australian interests.

The material in relation to JI is even more compelling. That is because this organisation has had an impact in the region of the world in which we reside. The report notes that there are links to Australia. The statement states that disruption by regional authorities has resulted in JI having to scale down its previous organisational structure from four mantiqi territory areas of responsibility, which originally encompassed parts of Australia, to only one mantiqi covering Indonesia. It goes on to say:

As stated in the previous report, the threat to Australians travelling in Indonesia is still present. Australia continues to issue travel warnings to Australians travelling in Indonesia.

The statement of reasons makes no specific mention of other threats to Australia’s interests. This report ensures that the Australian public are aware that terrorism remains a risk to this community.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time allocated for this report has expired.

Arch Bevis (Brisbane, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, I present the annual report of the committee’s activities for the 2007-08 year.

Ordered that the report be made a parliamentary paper.

Due to the election during the period for which this report was prepared, the work of the committee in both the 41st and the 42nd parliaments is covered in the report. I would like at the outset to take this opportunity to thank the members of the committee in the 41st parliament. In particular, I would like to place on the record our thanks for the work of the chairperson of the committee in the 41st parliament, the Hon David Jull. I am sure I can say on behalf of everybody on both sides in this House who worked with David and knew him that we wish him good health and a pleasant retirement. We hope he is enjoying the sunshine and some time away from the hurly-burly of this parliament.

The committee completed a very full and productive year scrutinising terrorism legislation and the administration and expenditure of the various intelligence agencies. Since the last annual report on the committee’s activities, which was tabled in June 2007, the committee has tabled six reports. In addition to the tabled reports, the committee is currently conducting the sixth review of administration and expenditure of the intelligence community agencies.

The fifth review of the administration and expenditure was the first full review which looked broadly at the administration and expenditure of the six intelligence and security agencies since the Intelligence Services Act was amended in December 2005 to add to the committee’s oversight responsibilities the Defence Imagery and Geospatial Organisation, otherwise known as DIGO; the Office of National Assessments, the ONA; and the Defence Intelligence Organisation, the DIO.

Overall, the committee was satisfied the administration of the six intelligence and security agencies was sound. The committee found that, whilst the security clearance process had been streamlined and some backlog had been cleared, completing clearances within a reasonable time frame was still an issue for most agencies. The recruitment of the required numbers of staff with necessary language skills also continues to remain an issue for most agencies. Overall, the committee indicated that agencies were doing all they could to overcome that particular problem.

The other major review of 2007 was the statutory review of the proscription of ‘terrorist organisations’ under subsection 102(1A)(2) of the Criminal Code. The committee noted the need for an adequate community communication or education program to accompany a listing or a relisting. This is an area of continuing interest to the committee.

I should also note that during the course of this annual review, on 5 May 2008, the committee accepted the resignation of Senator Robert Ray, a longstanding member of the committee. The committee recorded its appreciation by highlighting Senator Ray’s very substantial contribution to the work of the committee, noting that it had left the committee with an excellent reputation both in this parliament and in the Australian intelligence community.

Finally, the committee of the 42nd parliament is concerned that there is an insufficient pool of staff with the necessary top security clearances within the Department of the House of Representatives to provide flexibility in staffing. This committee, unlike any other in the parliament, does require support staff to have a quite intrusive, positive vet, top-security clearance. That is not normal for people who work in this building, but it does mean that the committee’s work requires a pool of staff within the House department who are able to meet that standard. The committee accordingly has made a recommendation about the need for additional staff to have the appropriate security clearances.

On behalf of the committee I again thank fellow members of the committee in the 42nd parliament and again place on record my thanks to those who served on the committee in the 41st parliament. I also thank the committee secretariat for the work they have done both in the 42nd parliament and in the 41st parliament. I commend the report to the House.

Philip Ruddock (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I first thank the Chair of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security for the observations he made about colleagues and the secretariat. Can I also add to his comments about the former chair, David Jull. I did not serve on the committee with David, but I have served with him as a minister and I know him very favourably as a colleague and friend. The circumstances in which he saw fit to retire are obviously of concern to us all and, like my colleague, I continue to wish him good health.

I was not there as a member of the committee when Robert Ray served, but I have shadowed him as a minister in a previous life. I have to say he was always a very formidable minister and parliamentarian; one whom I can now say—as he has left—I greatly admired and, I would have to say, with no offence to others who may have served as immigration minister, one of the most significant contributors in that area of public policy. But I understand that in relation to the work of this committee he also fulfilled a very important role in sage counsel and advice, and ensuring that a committee that undertakes work that is very much in the national interest was able to do it in a positive and constructive way. I very much regret that I am not able to continue to serve with him on this committee. May I also say I lament that one of my colleagues on this side of the House who has contributed very positively in public life, the former foreign minister Alexander Downer, is no longer with us. But he is a rather mercurial character who will be playing a fairly significant part in other parts of the world in endeavouring to resolve issues.

In relation to the annual report of the committee’s activities, half of which I have seen, I wish to simply comment on the nature of the committee’s work. It is a committee that has a fairly limited role. Legislation specifically charges that it will review the administration and the expenditure of all six intelligence agencies—ASIO, ASIS, DSD, DIGO, DIO and ONA—and other matters that are referred by the responsible minister or by resolution of each house of parliament. It is in that context that I think people need to understand the sensitivity of the work that is being undertaken. It does mean that people who bring a good deal of experience are charged with the responsibility of looking at these issues but are limited in what they are able to do and of course what they are able to say.

Part of the work of the committee has involved reviewing amendments made to security legislation, particularly terrorism enactments, and that included border security legislation amendments, Criminal Code suppression of terrorist bombings legislation and the suppression of terrorist financing legislation. It also meant that it could review division 3 of part 3 of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act and other amendments made to the Criminal Code.

But there are specific limits on the committee’s activities and it is appropriate that members are aware of that. That includes: the reviewing of intelligence gathering powers of the agencies; reviewing the sources of information and other operational assistance and methods; reviewing particular operations past, present or proposed; reviewing sources of information provided by a foreign government or agency; reviewing an aspect of activities of agencies that does not affect an Australian person; reviewing rules with the act relating to the privacy of Australian citizens and conducting inquiries into individual complaints. It is important that colleagues are aware of these limitations. Nevertheless, as we saw with the report just tabled, the work that is being undertaken can give the Australian community greater confidence in the efforts of our agencies and in that sense the committee plays a very important part in reassuring the Australian community.