Skip to main content

Detention Orders: Out of Court!

Much has been written in the last days about the detention Order imposed on Jack Thomas. The Federal A-G has, yet again, disgraced himself and his office, by making all sorts of pronouncements when the Jack Thomas matter is presently before the Courts - first, the detention Order itself and the adjourned hearing in the Victorian Court of Appeal.

Meanwhile, The Australian nails its flag to the the masthead by shamelessly villifying Thomas in various ways. Brian Walters SC, President of Liberty Victoria, writing in Crikey, attacks the Order and the implications for all Australians.

Professor George Williams and Edwina MacDonald are based at the Gilbert + Tobin Centre of Public Law, University of NSW. They have written a sober op-ed piece in this today's SMH:

"Control orders have no precedent in Australia. They give the Government a second chance to deprive someone of their liberty even after they have been acquitted in a fair trial or had any convictions quashed on appeal. Indeed, there is a real prospect that the High Court could strike down the law as a breach of the separation of powers in our constitution.

We do need tough laws to deal with terrorism. This is why such offences are among the most serious on the statute book. They not only criminalise committing or attempting a terrorist act, but also preparing for one."

Read the full piece here - and bear in mind that the sort of laws we are talking about here affect everyone, for no one is immune from there wide net. Remember too the underlying issue in all of this as succinctly put in the Williams - McDonald piece:

"The law normally states that someone can be deprived of their liberty only where a jury drawn from the community has found the evidence against them proved beyond reasonable doubt. With a control order, there is no jury. A judge sitting alone need only find on the balance of probabilities that the order would substantially assist in preventing terrorism or that a person has received terrorist training."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reading the Chilcot Inquiry Report more closely

Most commentary on the Chilcot Inquiry Report of and associated with the Iraq War, has been "lifted" from the Executive Summary.   The Intercept has actually gone and dug into the Report, with these revelations : "THE CHILCOT REPORT, the U.K.’s official inquiry into its participation in the Iraq War, has finally been released after seven years of investigation. Its executive summary certainly makes former Prime Minister Tony Blair, who led the British push for war, look terrible. According to the report, Blair made statements about Iraq’s nonexistent chemical, biological, and nuclear programs based on “what Mr. Blair believed” rather than the intelligence he had been given. The U.K. went to war despite the fact that “diplomatic options had not been exhausted.” Blair was warned by British intelligence that terrorism would “increase in the event of war, reflecting intensified anti-US/anti-Western sentiment in the Muslim world, including among Muslim communities in the

Robert Fisk's predictions for the Middle East in 2013

There is no gain-saying that Robert Fisk, fiercely independent and feisty to boot, is the veteran journalist and author covering the Middle East. Who doesn't he know or hasn't he met over the years in reporting from Beirut - where he lives?  In his latest op-ed piece for The Independent he lays out his predictions for the Middle East for 2013. Read the piece in full, here - well worthwhile - but an extract... "Never make predictions in the Middle East. My crystal ball broke long ago. But predicting the region has an honourable pedigree. “An Arab movement, newly-risen, is looming in the distance,” a French traveller to the Gulf and Baghdad wrote in 1883, “and a race hitherto downtrodden will presently claim its due place in the destinies of Islam.” A year earlier, a British diplomat in Jeddah confided that “it is within my knowledge... that the idea of freedom does at present agitate some minds even in Mecca...” So let’s say this for 2013: the “Arab Awakening” (the t

An unpalatable truth!

Quinoa has for the last years been the "new" food on the block for foodies. Known for its health properties, foodies the world over have taken to it. Many restaurants have added it to their menu. But, as this piece " Can vegans stomach the unpalatable truth about quinoa? " from The Guardian so clearly details, the cost to Bolivians and Peruvians - from where quinoa hails - has been substantial. "Not long ago, quinoa was just an obscure Peruvian grain you could only buy in wholefood shops. We struggled to pronounce it (it's keen-wa, not qui-no-a), yet it was feted by food lovers as a novel addition to the familiar ranks of couscous and rice. Dieticians clucked over quinoa approvingly because it ticked the low-fat box and fitted in with government healthy eating advice to "base your meals on starchy foods". Adventurous eaters liked its slightly bitter taste and the little white curls that formed around the grains. Vegans embraced quinoa as