A passion that I have recognised in myself lies in the industry of Public Administration and Safety. To be more specific the sector that I will be focusing on within this industry is The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO). The organisation offers a development program pertaining to the Intelligence Officer
Yet, with no foreseeable end in sight to Australia’s ‘war on terror’, counter Preventative Detention Orders serve as a viable alternatives to judicial trials, by allowing Police to ‘detain or restrict the movement of individuals without charge or conviction’. External reviews of PDO’s by the Law Council of Australia has deemed these measures ‘justifiably balance security and civil liberties’ by prioritizing community safety over the presumed innocence of terror
TERRORISM: LEGAL AND NON-LEGAL RESPONSES Evaluate the effectiveness of the legal and non-legal responses to the Bali Bombings The 2002 Bali Bombings were a series of suicide bombing attacks on the popular western tourist district of Kuta, Bali - an island of Indonesia. The attack occurred on October 12, 2002 and took the lives of 202 people; 88 of which were Australian nationals. This response will evaluate the legal and non-legal responses to the Bali Bombings according to the following criteria: resource efficiency, accessibility, enforceability, responsiveness, protection of individual rights, meeting society 's needs and the application of the rule of law, and aims to answer the question that, in this case, has justice been
The case of Thomas v Mowbray revolutionised and created a new, broad, perspective of the constitutional defence powers in regards to terrorism. This was the first case to reach the High Court on the validity of anti-terrorism measures that were recently introduced to Australia by the executive. Thomas made several submissions within this case, including that the defence power was limited to defence against threats from foreign states and that the words ‘naval and military’ present in the wording of the section confines the defence power to those activities and cannot underpin broader activities to protect the community. Unfortunately, on the first point there was a 6:1 majority that the law was valid under the power for threats both domestic and foreign. Kirby J dissent held that the Commonwealth had essentially failed to establish the factual basis that was needed to support its reliance on the defence power. Further, Kirby J concluded that the ‘facts underpinning the war on terror did not constitute hostilities for the purposes of the first limb of the defence power.’ The majority of the High Court upheld the constitutional validity of the anti-terrorism laws that allowed for the courts to impose control orders upon persons of whom they believed to pose a threat due to their connections to listed terrorist organisations, regardless of the possibly that some derogable rights maybe be overridden. The control order imposed on Thomas required him to remain in his residence
Policing has changed since 9/11. They wanted different ways to detect terrorist actions and criminal acts. So community policing was implemented. The government has provided money and has been supportive in agencies efforts to participate in community policing. “For example, the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), a branch of the Department of Justice, provide funding to local police agencies to hire 100,000 new community policing officers in the 1990s” (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2000 as cited in Chappell, 2009, 6).
September 11, 2001 (herein referred to as 9/11) was a day in American history, which will be remembered as the most horrific attack on American soil. This attack, carried out by nineteen Islamic extremists, was associated with al-Qaeda, and involved the hijacking of four airplanes. Two of those airplanes were hijacked and flown directly into the World Trade Center in New York City, New York. The third plane’s target was the Pentagon in Washington D.C., and the fourth plane was brought down in Pennsylvania where it is believed the passengers aboard fought the hijackers. This horrific day in history cost over 3,000 people their lives, and was labeled the worst attack on American soil since the attack on Pearl Harbor during World War II.
On April 19, 1995, a terrorist set off a bomb at the Alfred P. Murrah Federal building. The explosion killed 168 people and injured 842 more. The bomb went off at 9:02 a.m., and it “destroying a third of the building and left a thirty-foot-wide crater” (Casey 2).
In 2010, the Australian Federal Government released its Counter-Terrorism White Paper. It stipulates that Australia’s counter-terrorism strategy has four fundamental key points: (The Counter-Terrorism White Paper, 2010, p iii) Analysis - focussed on prevention through intelligence, protection - focussed on border management and increased airport security, Response - cooperative relationships between Intelligence, security and Law enforcement agencies nationally and Resilience - Unified rejection
3. Australian International Law – Australia’s legal system and effectiveness. Peter Greste - Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
The terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 shook up the lives of all Americans. On September 11, 2001, nineteen radicals who were associated with the Islamic extremist group al-Qaeda high jacked four airplanes with the intent to carry out terrorist attacks. Two airplanes went into the towers of the World Trade Center in New York City killing over two thousand six hundred people. They also attacked the pentagon in Washington D.C killing over one hundred people, as well as a plane going down in Pennsylvania killing all people aboard the plane. Due to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, national security has improved dramatically with the intent of an increase of public safety.
Australian Criminal Justice System The Australian Criminal Justice system has an intricate and diverse structure that makes it one of the most unique systems in the world. The Commonwealth of Australia was approved by the British Parliament in 1900 and came into existence on January 1, 1901. The federal constitution combined British and American practices, with a parliamentary government, but with two houses - the popularly elected House of Representatives and Senate representing the former colonies. This began the start of a new era of policing. (Findlay, Odgers, Yeo). The Commonwealth of Australia is a federalist government composed of a national government and six State governments. There are nine different criminal justice systems in Australia - six states, two territories, and one federal. The eight States and Territories have powers to enact their own criminal law, while the Commonwealth has powers to enact laws. Criminal law is administered principally through the federal, State and Territory police. (Chappell, Wilson, Heaton). In this essay an in depth analysis of the Australian criminal justice system will be given, along with a comparison to the United States criminal justice system throughout the essay. As well as an evaluation of the effectiveness of the system and finally a brief summary of how the Australian criminal justice system structure could be improved to better suit the evolving society. Australia has a complex and very intuitive system of policing that
What happened on 9/11? On September 11, 2001 four U.S planes were hijacked by a known terrorist group, called Al-Qaeda. The plane’s flight 11, and united airlines
Do control orders facilitate the rule of law? Introduction Since 9/11, the Australian government has enacted over 60 counter-terrorism laws to assist in the fight against the rising threat of terrorism in Australia. This legislation has recently been brought into question given the rise of extremist groups such as Islamic State and the lifting of Australia’s terror level to “High”. Prior to 9/11 there were no specific laws in order to combat terrorism specifically in the Criminal Code. Australia’s national anti-terror laws are alarming not just in their volume, but also in their widespread scope. They include powers for warrantless searches, the banning of organisations, preventive detention, and the undisclosed detention and interrogation of non-suspect citizens by the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO). The progress of these laws though parliament was eased by Australia’s absence of a national bill or charter of rights. The fast enactment of the laws was also aided by an apprehensive atmosphere and a feeling of urgency. This quick enactment has raised concerns over the many years since the legislation passed regarding the facilitation of the rule of law given the extensive powers that the Commonwealth has in regards to national defence and security. One such example of legislation that has proven to be controversial and has drawn supporters and critics alike are control orders under Division 104 of the Criminal Code. The paper will assess whether or not
3) “It was not until after 9/11 that democratic countries introduced legislation that criminalised an ‘act of terrorism’” (O’Hare, 2011) To aid police in their fight against terrorism, the Australian Government has made a significant number of changes to current legislation, as well as introducing a number of new counter-terrorism laws to assist law enforcement in responding to terrorist threats. “The states and territories have referred legislative powers to the Commonwealth to allow the creation of a single set of terrorism offences under the Criminal Code Act 1995 (the Criminal Code).” (Counter-Terrorism White Paper, 2010, p. 55) These amendments, and additional legislation, have been instrumental in allowing law enforcement to respond to terrorist threats. In addition to new criminal offences, new powers include; more effective detention and questioning powers; the ability to declare terrorist organisations illegal; and the ability to exercise more control over people’s movements. The new counter-terrorism “offences are aimed at individuals who engage in, train for, prepare, plan, finance or provide support for terrorist acts.” (Counter-Terrorism White Paper, 2010, p. 55) Other tools within the Criminal Code available are ‘control orders’ and ‘preventative detention’. “Control orders are protective measures that can restrict a person’s movements and activities.” (Counter-Terrorism White Paper, 2010, p. 57) Whereas
September 11, 2001 marked the most horrific day in history for United States of America. The events of this day changed the lives of those residing in America forever. United States was considered somewhat safe, in regards to terrorists’ attacks. However, this all came to a screeching halt when 19 militants known to be a part of the Al-Qaeda terrorist group hijacked four planes for the purpose of destroying targeted areas in the United States. As a result of the deadly attack on the United States, security measures drastically changed. Although, security measures throughout the United States have been in place, extreme caution came into effect. All departments looked at different measures to improve preventing terrorists’ attacks.