David Jull (Fadden, Liberal Party) Share 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 and Jemaah Islamiya.

Ordered that the report be made a parliamentary paper.

I present the report of the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Intelligence and Security into the relisting of al-Qaeda and Jemaah Islamiah as terrorist organisations. This review has raised a procedural question about the type of information presented by the Attorney in arguing for the continuation of a listing. It is the committee’s view that, on a relisting, it would be preferable to see arguments about the activities of the organisation in the period since the last consideration. Background information about the history of the terrorist activities of an organisation is useful, but the committee believes that the arguments for a relisting should concentrate on recent activities and information about what has changed since the last review, whether that be an increase or a decrease in terrorist activity. The relisting of an organisation is a fresh exercise of executive discretion and the committee believes there must, therefore, be a sufficient degree of currency in the evidence to warrant the use of the power.

In this report, the committee also wishes to reiterate two issues raised in previous reviews. The first relates to the manner in which information is provided in the statement of reasons. The legal test for the listing of an organisation is set out in the Criminal Code. However, this test is broad and does not explain why particular organisations are selected for listing. ASIO has provided additional criteria which it uses. These criteria are provided in this report. The committee has found the criteria useful as a means of assessing the arguments provided by the government in each statement of reasons and, in previous reports, the committee has asked the government to address these criteria in future statements of reasons. This has not occurred to date. The request is repeated in this report. It is the committee’s view that a clearer exposition of the criteria would strengthen the government’s arguments, provide greater clarity and consistency in the evidence and therefore increase public confidence in the regime as a whole. It would greatly facilitate the committee’s review process if this change occurred.

The question of community information regarding these regulations also remains a difficulty. On these current regulations there was no attempt to inform the community beyond the press release that was issued by the Attorney-General. Perhaps, on organisations of the profile of these two, this is not as important as in other cases.

On the substantive question of the threat posed by the organisations themselves, the committee has sought to consider each against ASIO’s criteria. It is notable that not all categories in the criteria are covered in the statements of reasons. In this review, the committee has sought to understand the current circumstances of each organisation. In each case, there are complex forces at work. Each organisation has been under considerable pressure and yet structural decline has not led to a lessening of the threat. However, it is unclear whether the threat comes directly from the organisation as such or from some wider and widening response to the war on terrorism.

The committee notes that all sources describe al-Qaeda as an organisation that is damaged and fragmented by the pressure that has been brought to bear on it since September 2001. Its capacity is now aspirational and ideological rather than material or advisory. However, all also argue that the influence of the organisation and its capacity to inspire jihadist activities have grown as a result of actions in the war on terrorism, particularly the war in Iraq. In particular, the Attorney-General’s statement of reasons quotes bin Laden who, in advocating terrorism, says that the bombings in Europe are revenge for invasion and occupation of Muslim lands. It is this capacity of al-Qaeda to inspire disconnected groups which remains a concern.

On Jemaah Islamiah, the picture is also a complex one. The International Crisis Group notes that, while there is an intersection and overlapping of personal networks, there are divisions over tactics among terrorist groups in Indonesia and that individuals often operate on their own.

The committee does not recommend disallowance of the regulations relating to either al-Qaeda or Jemaah Islamiah. I commend the report to the House.

See this speech in context