The highly debatable new move by the government to fight terrorism 40



View Profile

With all that has been happening in here and around the world, Australia is taking a step forward to fight terrorism – indefinite detention.

The Federal Government is pushing hard for legislation in every state so some terrorists who have been convicted could be kept in jail after their sentences expire if a court says they would reoffend.

In fact, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has already written to state and territory leaders asking them to quickly agree on laws that could keep terrorists in jail if the threat is assessed as serious, reports ABC.

Federal Attorney-General George Brandis said he wanted laws similar to those in some states which keep sex offenders in jail after they have served their sentence if they still posed a serious risk to the community.

He said this would only apply to very high risk offenders who show no signs of rehabilitation when they are near the end of their sentence.

“They are people who would be assessed to pose a continuing and serious risk to community safety,” said Senator Brandis who also mentioned that it could amount to indefinite detention.

“I make no apology for the Government taking the view that if a person, having served a sentence of imprisonment for a serious crime, shows every indication of a willingness to repeat that crime, to reoffend as soon as they are released, they should remain behind bars,” the Attorney-General said.

Whether the Government wanted the laws because of any specific convicted terrorists in jail now, it is not known

“I am not going to talk about individual cases for obvious reasons.”

Who will this measure apply to?

Some argue that keeping terrorists in jail after their sentence expires raises legal concerns about procedural fairness and double punishment. However, Senator Brandis argued that state laws for sex offenders have been upheld by the high court and this new measure would only apply to the most serious category of offender.

He also said existing measures like control orders might be used instead for some terrorists, meaning instead of staying in jail longer they might have to wear a tracking device, report regularly to police or be banned from using the internet.

State leaders were briefed by ASIO’s Director General last December at Mr Turnbull’s first council of Australian Governments meeting and agreed to the idea, then endorsed the next step in April.

Senator Brandis acknowledged there was a risk that leaving terrorists locked up beyond their sentence – their supporters might be provoked.

“These are all fine judgements that have to be taken into account but always subject to getting the right balance between two very, very important considerations — one is community safety and the other is the rights of the individual,” he said.

What do you think of this new effort?

Starts at 60 Writers

The Starts at 60 writers team seek out interesting topics and write them especially for you.

  1. Not good enough. If they are terrorists then deport them. Why should we have to pay for their keep. Also stop immigration until they can screen people thoroughly as it is evident this is not happening.

    4 REPLY
    • Deport them never, that’s setting them free to do it again. Lock them up forever, never released.

    • Convicted terrorists should never be released. Radicalisation can not be cured. It festers until it is released. What we need to remember is that many terrorists are home-grown so where do you report them to having been born here. If it keeps our country and her people safe, keep them locked up.

    • Rosanne Newton – I agree with you. I know there is no simple solution and if they were born in Australia it gets even more complicated but we should not have to pay for them in jail. Would love to see them sent back to the country they are fighting for.

      1 REPLY
    • I agree with Rosanne this is just to ridiculous to be even debated, how many more times do we see the problems caused by these people, and how many hospitals that we don’t know about have a special section for these poor girls who are abused in such an horrific way, ( believe at least every main hospital)
      what else are we not getting told about? the whole idea is ridiculous, there is to much going on that the public don’t get to hear about, it’s not just the terrorists it’s the whole sneaky way the government and media are hiding details of their agreements to keep abuse hidden in our own back yard

  2. I agree Rosanne, why should the Australian tax payer fund “rehabilitation” of terrorists or them being in prison. If this proposed legislation is anything like the parole system those making the judgement about if a terrorist is likely to re-offend will be way off the mark as they are currently when they grant parole to dangerous criminals who are released and commit the same crimes over and again. Parole boards are not accountable for their decisions, nor are judges.

    1 REPLY
    • 3. Conclusion: (“Islam101” by Gregory M. Davis)
      The chief barrier today to a better understanding of Islam — apart, perhaps, from outright fear — is sloppy language. Let us take, to start with, the much-vaunted “war on terror.” Upon scrutiny, the phrase “war on terror” makes as much sense as a war on “blitzkrieg,” “bullets,” or “strategic bombing.” The “war on terror” implies that it is perfectly fine if the enemy seeks to destroy us — and, indeed, succeeds in doing so — as long as he does not employ “terror” in the process. “Terrorism,” it should be obvious, is a tactic or stratagem used to advance a goal; it is the goal of Islamic terrorism that we must come to understand, and this logically.

      As should be plain to anyone who has examined the Islamic sources, to take the violence out of Islam would require it to jettison two things: the Quran as the word of Allah and Muhammad as Allah’s prophet. In other words, to pacify Islam would require its transformation into something that it is not. [There is no such thing as moderate Islam].

      Drawing their inspiration from Muhammad and the Quran, they are invariably disposed to violence. The unhappy (yet, truthful) fact is that Islam today is what it has been fourteen centuries: violent, intolerant, and expansionary. It is folly to think that we, in the course of a few years or decades, are going to be able to change the basic world outlook of a foreign civilization. Islam’s violent nature must be accepted as given; only then will we be able to come up with appropriate policy responses that can improve our chances of survival.

      Share this:

  3. I wouldn’t trust George Brandis, no matter what legislation he put forward. He’s neo-conservative and doesn’t believe anybody should have any rights unless they’re one of the so called “elite.” Sorry George, you have form.

    1 REPLY
  4. I agree with comments of Rosanne, deport terrorist suspects,and stricter in depth rules for incomes. After all new people from the 40s to at least the early 60s were screened .most anyway!

    1 REPLY
    • If I remember rightly, when we arrived here in the 1960’s we had to sign a form agreeing that if we were convicted of a crime we would be returned to our home country. Somebody correct me if I’m wrong. If I’m right, when did this change so that you can commit all sorts of crimes and not be deported.

  5. I agree too – why are we keeping these oxygen thieves – drop them out of a plane over the Middle east & let them look after themselves, they should feel right at home, they certainly don’t appreciate what they have here. It is costing us millions that could be used to help homeless & disadvantaged people here, what a disgrace, huge waste of public money. These idiots collude with each other in prison for heavens sake, what planet are these do-gooders on?….Earth calling pollies & judges….we can see it why can’t you?

  6. I agree Rosanne Newton, the money it is going to cost to keep these murderers in gaol could be used to help our own homeless people, returned vets and our aged pensioners. Yes, deport them and their families and close the borders. Not only do we have an issue with muslims but who knows what diseases they are bringing into our country, it’s just not good enough. I am sick of these whimpy politicians cowering to the muslims every need…..are they afraid of them? Turnbull is supposed to be looking out for Australians and keeping us safe but it appears he doesn’t care.

  7. Don’t see what’s ‘debatable’ about it. Jail for life – meaning life – for those offenders born here; those born overseas sent right back again AFTER they’ve spent some time in jail (or gaol before some nitpicker picks me up on the older style spelling).

  8. If they are Australian born, jail for life. Depart the others quick smart, we should not have to pay for their keep.

  9. Why should money be spent on keeping them in jail. Send them back where they came from with their extended families also. They supposedly came here for a better life but that appears to be a load of lies. If our government cannot see that they are a danger to us they must be wearing blinkers.

  10. I think that it’s a typical Gov’t patch up job, ” there’s a problem, let’s look as though we’re doing something whist really doing bigger all”!
    I have long thought that since we abolished the death penalty, (no, I don’t propose re introducing it), we need to replace it with a, “for the term of your natural life penalty”. Under the current laws murderers, terrorists etc. can look forward to life after jail, but their victims and families can’t. This way a murderer can look forward to four walls for the rest of their lives. If they are later found to be innocent, they can be released, a bit difficult to do if they were executed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *