Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Home Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Organised crime affects all Australians. The Australian Crime Commission estimates that between $10-$15 billion dollars every year is lost as a result of organised crime. This is money that is being siphoned from legitimate Australian businesses; it is money that cannot be spent on education, health or any number of services. And in this way, organised crime steals from every Australian citizen every day.

In an age where borders are increasingly permeable, effective and efficient international crime cooperation is increasingly important. The growing use of sophisticated technology by organised criminal groups means assets derived from criminal activities are often moved offshore to avoid detection and confiscation by local authorities.

Organised criminals are motivated by greed—money is their lifeblood. If we can stop the money flow we can stop organised criminals in their tracks. The Gillard government has made combating organised crime a priority, and being able to confiscate assets and profits which are a result of crimes committed overseas is a key plank in this strategy.

Legislative framework

Australia has a strong framework for cooperating with foreign countries and restraining and confiscating benefits derived from foreign criminal offences where those assets are located in Australia. Part VI of the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 1987 (Mutual Assistance Act) enables an Australian court to register and enforce orders issued by a foreign court. These foreign orders include restraining, confiscation and pecuniary penalty orders over property derived from serious criminal offences.

Once a foreign order is registered in Australia, it is able to be enforced as though it were an Australian order made under the Proceeds of Crime Act.

Provisions in the International Criminal Court Act 2002 and the International War Crimes Tribunals Act 1995 expand upon the regime in the Mutual Assistance Act and allow an Australian court to register and enforce forfeiture orders issued by the International Criminal Court and specified international war crimes tribunals.

A recent High Court decision regarding New South Wales proceeds of crime related provisions has highlighted the importance of ensuring that functions imposed onto a court properly reflect the nature of judicial functions under c hapter III of the Constitution. Specifically, the decision reinforced that courts must be allowed to exercise supervision over the making or enforcement of proceeds of crime orders.

Amendments in bill

To ensure the legislative framework providing a court with the power to register and enforce foreign orders continues to operate as intended, this bill will make minor but important amendments to the Mutual Assistance Act, the International Criminal Court Act and the International War Crimes Tribunal Act.

The amendments to each of these a cts will provide a court with greater discretion when determining whether a foreign order should be registered and enforced in Australia and whether or not to hear an application for registration on an ex parte basis. The amended provisions will require a court to register a foreign order unless it considers it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so. In determining whether registration of a foreign order is in the interests of justice, the court is to give due regard to the overarching purpose of the regime.

Objects provision

In order to clarify the purpose of this regime, the bill will also insert an object clause into subdivision A of part VI of the Mutual Assistance Act. The objective of the subdivision is to enable Australia to give effect to foreign orders in situations where property related to serious foreign offences is located in Australia. As reciprocity is the fundamental basis of international crime cooperation, it is vital that we are able to provide the same level of assistance to other countries as we would expect of them.

Conclusion

Where a person has committed a serious offence in a foreign country, and proceeds from that offence are located within Australia, it is important that Australia is able to enforce foreign orders. Australia must not be seen as a safe haven for criminals and their ill-gotten gains.

These amendments will ensure that the legislative framework continues to operate as intended and that Australia can register foreign proceeds of crime orders in an effective and timely fashion.

I commend this b ill to the House.

Debate adjourned.