Gai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Cyber Security and Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As the shadow assistant minister for cybersecurity and defence, I welcome the proposed amendments to the Crimes Legislation Amendment (International Crime Cooperation and Other Measures) Bill 2016. The amendments will address legislative inconsistencies in areas relating to mutual assistance, proceeds of crime and extradition—all issues that will be faced with the international characteristics of the types of crime I see emerging in the cybersecurity portfolio. The bill also proposes amendments in a number of areas that Labor has a very strong track record on: international crime cooperation, support for vulnerable witnesses, slavery, forced labour and forced marriage, anti-money-laundering and federal policing.

While the amendments are welcome, there are also emerging crimes that will pose challenges to our legal frameworks, both domestically and internationally. These are in the areas of cybersecurity and also in the increased focus and increased exposure of sexual violence in conflict as a war crime under the United Nations women, peace and security agenda. The technical amendments in this bill highlight the increased prevalence of technology and its use in both the commission of crime and, on the flipside, the monitoring, surveillance and prosecution of crime. Amendments align the existing provisions under the mutual assistance act and the telecommunications interception act, authorising the sharing of information with foreign countries, with the International Criminal Court Act. The type of material that may be shared with the International Criminal Court could be stored communications, historical telecommunications data, prospective telecommunications data and surveillance assistance. As the shadow minister I welcome the changes, because cybercrime activities—in all their forms, from cyberwarfare, cyberterrorism and cyberespionage through to child pornography and exploitation, ransomware, phishing and spear phishing—in this global world, through the internet, are cross jurisdictional activities.

There is no doubt that there will need to be greater focus on what international cooperation will look like when it comes to prosecuting people and organisations for these crimes, some of which are new or emerging types of crime that present a challenge to our traditional legal procedures, precedents and frameworks. Not only will it be a telling exercise for the preparedness and responsiveness of countries, when it comes to their cybersecurity frameworks, but also for the cooperation between governments in terms of data and the compulsion to release it. While a cooperative and collaborative relationship exists between government and corporations in Australia's e-safety regime, we need to constantly look at how we can further enhance our cooperation in these areas at the international level. It will be an interesting test to see how much of these frameworks will emerge in an international environment, when it has been difficult to establish regulatory norms for cybersecurity. Fortunately, this is still the Holy Grail that we're trying to establish. We have the Tallinn manual that outlines the range of international law that applies to the cybersecurity space. The UN GGE has been unable to meet agreement on cybersecurity norms and how the norms should operate in cyberspace. Without that sort of multilateral framework, we are now faced with having to try and get those norms established at a bilateral, quadrilateral or regional level.

I note we have the minister here. In the absence of those UN GGE multilateral norms, that usual UN framework that governs so much—the sea, telecommunications and so many international regulations and norms—we do need to focus our efforts. Given the absence of the UN reaching resolution on what we're going to be doing on cyberspace and cyber norms, we do need to be acting very aggressively, because this is changing rapidly. So we need to very aggressively, with a sense of urgency, engage in mechanisms, in architecture, at the regional, bilateral and quadrilateral level to establish and agree on those norms, and to use existing architecture, possibly through ASEAN and APEC, through the Indian Ocean Commission, through the Pacific Island Forum—to use the existing architecture that we have. Given the urgency on this there's no need to reinvent the wheel in terms of cybersecurity architecture; so we need to use the existing multilateral regional architecture that we have to drive resolution on agreed norms.

Without that UN framework, we have a significant gap. Yes, there is a lot of discussion at the G20s and at the APECs and through the communiques that come out of those multilateral regional events. There is a lot of agreement on what should be done, but what we really need to do is agree those norms. It is vital that we get everyone singing from the same song sheet in terms of how we're going to govern and agree to our behaviours in the cybersecurity space.

It's a perfect opportunity, now that the minister has walked in, to urge him to act. He's got his ambassador there; you've got people down in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade busily working on this. Please, we need to get those norms established. Ideally it would be at that multilateral UN level, but—given that we haven't been able to achieve that, despite a lot of concerted effort over many years—I do implore the minister to see what we can do in terms of agreeing norms amongst the Five Eyes community, quadrilaterals and regionals and using the existing architecture that I mentioned before.

I was also keen to talk about this piece of legislation and the amendments because of another area that I'm concerned about, and that I have been advocating on very strongly, which is sexual violence in conflict and the prosecution of those who participate in sexual violence in conflict. It's an important issue that I have been working on with the Women, Peace and Security community—the women in that community—and the Prosecute Don't Perpetrate community, because we know that Daesh has used sexual violence as a tactic of war. Sexual violence is a war crime, and we should treat it as such. The occurrence of systematic rape is well documented in Iraq and Syria. It is a crime against humanity, it is a crime again women, and we should treat it as such.

We should be speaking about sexual violence in conflict—which is what I'm speaking about here—and sexual violence more generally, and we should be holding the perpetrators to account no matter where they are. This is why I'm a strong advocate for and a strong participant in the Prosecute Don't Perpetrate campaign—to get those foreign fighters back here and get them prosecuted under sexual-violence-in-conflict legislation and norms. Over 100 Australians have travelled to Iraq and Syria to fight with Daesh and other extremist groups. We need to investigate and prosecute the sexual violence they've perpetrated as war crimes, as crimes against humanity, for these are all crimes under Australian domestic law. The amendments to this bill don't cover off this issue, but, in terms of providing material to the United Nations, they do cover off issues to do with the International Criminal Court. Again, I'm putting it out there that we need to prosecute those who have committed sexual violence in conflict.

It's difficult. I'm the first to admit that it's difficult—as we see from looking at the history of prosecution of sexual violence in conflict over the years, such as the rape camps that happened in the Second World War in Eastern Europe. There have been a number of instances where sexual violence has been used as a tactic of war, as a tactic of terrorism, as a tactic of genocide, and it is very, very difficult to prosecute those crimes. It requires a great deal of bravery from the witnesses. Most importantly, it's very difficult to get the evidence, particularly when you're in a conflict environment. Who collects the evidence? If a witness is brave enough to come forward, then who actually collects that evidence? Is it a soldier in the field? Is it someone who is there working on the post-conflict transition? Who collects that information? Is it a civilian working in this space in a conflict environment? That's the real challenge. Not only do we need a sense of urgency and real will to prosecute these crimes—and those are there—but getting the evidence is the real challenge. So we need to set up frameworks, systems, guidelines and procedures so that we can collect the evidence and bring these crimes to the courts.

I know that armies and defence forces around the world have been examining a range of different mechanisms to get that evidence collected. I encourage the Australian authorities on this. I know we have a very active community through the Australian Defence Force, and also, in New York, we have a very active military community which is working on the Women, Peace Security agenda. But we do need to constantly look at the mechanisms through which we can get the evidence. That's the real challenge—how to get the evidence in a conflict environment.

One of Labor's core values is a fundamental belief that everyone should have access to justice, no matter what their postcode, no matter how much their parents earn, no matter what their background, no matter what their race or religion, and that includes providing adequate support for vulnerable witnesses. This bill corrects an anomaly introduced back in 2013 and extends the current offence of identifying a child witness or vulnerable adult complainant to the identification of a child complainant. The support and protection available for victims and witnesses in future criminal proceedings, regardless of when the alleged conduct occurred, is also clarified. This is a significant step in a number of ways. If we are to tackle abhorrent crimes like human trafficking and slavery, it is essential that vulnerable witnesses, like those women who are victims of sexual violence in conflict, be given protections and support in proceedings before the courts. In its submission to the Senate inquiry on this bill, Anti-Slavery Australia said:

Victims and witnesses are often reluctant to give evidence, as they or their families may have been subjected to, or threatened with violence.

Providing support and protection for vulnerable witnesses and complainants is absolutely necessary in ensuring access to justice.

The government has stated that the purpose of the bill is to:

… enhance Australia's position globally in the fight against crime, making improvements to our international crime cooperation arrangements and our ability to assist international courts and tribunals.

The amendments in this bill go some way towards enhancing Australia's position, but, as I've mentioned, there will be ongoing and emerging challenges to Australia's position in the fight against crime. We need to act, not just speak out, against those perpetrators of sexual violence in conflict. We need to not just speak out against it; we need to actually start prosecuting, if we can. We need the evidence for that, and we need the guidelines and the frameworks to be able to collect that evidence.

There is also an emerging challenge, a constant daily challenge, to enhance our cybersecurity frameworks to not only prevent but to identify and prosecute cybercriminals wherever they may be. These amendments will go some way towards harmonising Australia's domestic laws with international laws. Labor supports the amendments in this bill.

Anne Aly (Cowan, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to commend the Crimes Legislation Amendment (International Crime Cooperation and Other Measures) Bill 2016 to the House. Labor has a strong record in many of the areas that are covered by this bill: the fight against slavery, anti-money-laundering measures and international crime cooperation.

I want to make a point about Australia's law enforcement agencies and the excellent international reputation that they have. I commend them for their high level of skill and say that this is a great source of pride for Australia. A good example of that is the international cooperation of the AFP with law enforcement of our closest regional neighbour, Indonesia. A report by ASPI written in March 2014 called A return on investment: The future of police cooperation between Australia and Indonesia mentions some of the broader benefits of such cooperation beyond just law enforcement. It says:

The benefits of past AFP-POLRI cooperation have been felt largely in the transactional dimension of crime fighting, but the police-to-police relationship benefits other government agencies and the broader bilateral relationship too. Benefits have also accrued to the community and businesses in both countries, and the police-to-police relationship has promoted Australian and Indonesian interests in Southeast Asia.

That quote encompasses the ripple effect of cooperation in law enforcement. It doesn't just impact the transactional dimension of international crime fighting but has effects into the communities as well.

Indeed, international and transnational crime in today's environment is not only much more extensive than it has been in the past; it's also much more complex because it's more fluid. To take the case of terrorism, for example, it's not unthinkable that an attack could be planned in one country and executed in another country using funds diverted from a third country with perpetrators from fourth or fifth countries. We've had examples of that in the past with international terrorist incidents and transnational terrorist incidents. In fact, the landscape of transnational and international crime is far more challenging in today's environment than it has been in the past. That is why it's essential that we continue to ensure that our police and law enforcement agencies are able to operate in an international context in ways which are not unnecessarily impeded by legislation or by processes.

Although this bill makes some relatively technical amendments to the various Commonwealth acts, these amendments actually have the capacity to make some real differences in facilitating international cooperation in practice. The bill will assist in the investigation and prosecution of people responsible for some of the most serious crimes under international law, such as genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. The member for Canberra, who spoke before me, spoke extensively to this part of the bill.

But the bill will also further ensure that vulnerable people, particularly children, are protected by extending the current provisions to make it illegal to identify child complainants. This is especially relevant to cases involving online child exploitation where such cases often involve victims who are not witnesses in a trial—that is, victims who are children and who are classed as complainants. In addition to that, many of the victims of human trafficking and slavery fear for their safety if they assist in an investigation and this can be, and often is, a challenge to successful prosecution. So extending the protections for victims will encourage and assist in these matters as well.

This bill addresses some of the ambiguities and inconsistencies in offences relating to slavery and it expands the definition of debt bondage so that it allies more closely with slavery-like offences. Anti-Slavery International describe debt bondage, also called bonded labour or debt slavery, as the most common form of modern slavery, even though it is one of the least known. Debt bondage is when a person is forced to work to pay off a debt and is conned into working for little or no pay, with no control over their debt. The money that they earn is taken off them to repay the debt, so they have to keep working in order to pay off the money that they borrowed. They also face coercion, violence and intimidation if they try to leave.

The main amendments under this schedule of the bill also expand the list of matters considered in determining whether a victim was coerced, threatened or deceived. These measures provide further protection for victims and, importantly, make our legislation more consistent with relevant international instruments. Debt bondage is most widespread in South Asian countries. I understand that the International Labour Organization estimates a minimum of 11.7 million in forced labour in the Asia-Pacific region, the majority of whom are in debt bondage. It's most common in areas such as agriculture, brick kilns, mines and factories.

I also note that an element in this schedule in the bill relates to forced marriage. I want to speak a little bit about that, because the bill will clarify the test for victims incapable of understanding the nature and effect of a marriage ceremony. I give heed to the many women's groups doing some very extraordinary work on the ground in countries such as Pakistan, Afghanistan and India around forced marriage. Forced marriage is particularly disturbing when it also involves a child. But I would also like to see that the test include an element to prove that a victim was incapable of understanding the effect of a marriage ceremony, and that element would, hopefully, include cases where marriage ceremonies are performed in a language that the victim doesn't understand as well as without her consent. Sadly, this is happening way too often as young girls raised in Western countries, such as Australia or the UK, are taken overseas by their parents and married off to complete strangers without their knowledge. They have no idea what's going on in a language that they lack competency in. The marriage ceremony can be performed in Arabic or Urdu. Often these young girls are raised in Australia and their first language is English. They have little command of their parents' mother tongue. They are sent back to these countries where they are married off and partake in a marriage ceremony with very little knowledge of what's happening because they don't understand the language.

I commend any of these measures and anything that we can do to make it easier for us and the international community to assist victims of forced marriage, who may be too young to understand what's going on, who may have a disability or an impairment that prevents them from understanding what's going on, or who may not understand the significance of the ceremony that they are taking part in. They might not know that it's a marriage ceremony. They might not have been told that it's a marriage ceremony. If we are going to be serious about our commitment to improving the conditions of women and girls throughout the world, which I believe we are—and I believe we have a bipartisan approach to improving those conditions for women and girls—we need this kind of legislation.

I'd like to move on and talk about the anti-money-laundering provisions of the bill, because they provide the Australian Charities and Not-For-Profits Commission with direct access to AUSTRAC information around financial intelligence. This amendment will allow the ACNC to fulfil its due diligence before registering charities and not-for-profit organisations and to monitor registered organisations, which will help them to ensure that organisations are not being used in the commission of serious crimes, including terrorism, or for money-laundering purposes.

I'd like to finish by again paying heed to the great work that our police forces do in their international efforts. As many of you know, I am the wife of a former police officer, a man who has dedicated his life to law enforcement. I'm obviously very proud of my husband and the work that he has done in law enforcement. I'm also very proud of the work that his colleagues do and, indeed, the dedication and commitment that all of our law enforcement professionals have. I've also had the privilege of seeing firsthand the work that our Federal Police do in Pakistan and in other countries internationally in three key areas. Firstly, in the area of collaboration, they broker collaboration with international law enforcement agencies to drive investigations and support bilateral or multilateral cooperation. Secondly, they cooperate with them in the area of intelligence gathering, through the collection and exchange of criminal intelligence in support of international law enforcement efforts. Thirdly, in capacity building—which I think we are particularly proud of in this country—they enhance the capacity and the capability of international law enforcement agencies to combat transnational crime. I strongly support any measures that are going to help our law enforcement agencies and our law enforcement professionals continue to conduct this valuable work unfettered and do this work to the best of their capabilities. I commend this bill to the House.

Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Minister for Law Enforcement and Cybersecurity) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the honourable members for their valuable contributions to this debate on the Crimes Legislation Amendment (International Crime Cooperation and Other Measures) Bill 2016, which will make significant improvements to the Commonwealth's criminal justice system. I really appreciate the comments that have just been made and those by the member for Canberra a moment ago, particularly her comments on cybersecurity, where I think we can maintain a spirit of bipartisanship in dealing with what is a very serious, significant issue for Australia and Australians. The bill will strengthen Australia's international crime cooperation arrangements to ensure that we're in the best possible position to work with international partners to combat crime both here and abroad.

The amendments in the bill will ensure that Australia can respond effectively to requests for assistance from foreign countries and international bodies in accordance with our international obligations. The amendments will assist Australia to avoid becoming a safe haven for foreign proceeds of crime and also ensure that criminals can't evade justice by moving evidence across borders or fleeing jurisdictions, and I take the former speaker's point that increasingly fluid borders are a very serious issue in dealing with criminals. The bill introduces amendments to ensure vulnerable child complainants are afforded the same protections as adult complainants when giving evidence in Commonwealth criminal proceedings. It amends the AFP's internal drug and alcohol testing regime and integrity framework to allow the AFP to maintain the integrity of its workforce and ensure it can enforce its zero-tolerance policy regarding illicit drug-taking. Amendments will authorise the commissioner to extend the date of resignation for appointees under investigation for serious misconduct or corruption, again reinforcing the integrity of the AFP workforce. It includes amendments to the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 to provide additional flexibility to departing travellers reporting movements of physical currency and improve information-sharing between Commonwealth agencies.

The bill includes minor consequential amendments to the Australian Crime Commission Act to facilitate the use of the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission as an alternative name for the Australian Crime Commission. It makes amendments to the AusCheck Act to enable AusCheck to conduct and coordinate background checks on individuals in relation to declared major national events.

This bill will strengthen Australia's criminal justice framework, both domestically and internationally, ensuring that law enforcement and justice agencies are equipped with the necessary powers to fight crime at home and abroad. It will strengthen the government's ability to detect and address serious national security and other risks in relation to large-scale national events. It will enhance the Commonwealth's anti-human-trafficking and anti-slavery regime and the protections afforded to vulnerable witnesses within our criminal justice system.

The Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee has considered the bill and made recommendations for amendments, subject to which the committee recommends the bill be passed. The government has moved amendments that will implement the committee's recommendations. We also had consideration of this bill by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights and the government notes the Human Rights Committee's view on the Proceeds of Crime Act, the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act and the Extradition Act. We are committed to ensuring that Australia operates in a manner that is consistent with Australia's international law obligations, including international human rights obligations. I'd like to thank these committees for their consideration of the bill. I'd also like to assure the House that, consistent with these reports, the bill contains appropriate measures balanced by sensible and appropriate safeguards. I commend the bill to the House.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.