Kerry Nettle (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I want to indicate why the amendment of the Australian Greens was structured as it was to exclude the offences under section 20 and section 21 of the Charter of the United Nations Act. In doing so, I will read from the submission of Liberty Victoria on the bill. It says that:

... sections 20-1 of the Charter of United Nations Act 1945 (Cth) and section 102.6 of the Criminal Code by not requiring that there be intention or knowledge that funds be used to facilitate acts of violence are at odds with provisions of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and the Financial Action Task Force’s Special Recommendations on Terrorist Financing; provisions that are said to form part of the basis of the Bill. Both these documents, while calling for the criminalisation of the financing of terrorism, define financing of terrorism in a narrower manner than sections 20-1 of the Charter of United Nations Act 1945 (Cth) and section 102.6 of the Criminal Code, by emphasising the need for an intention or knowledge that funds will be used to carry out terrorism.

Unlike the offences in sections 20-1 of the Charter of United Nations Act 1945 (Cth) and section 102.6 of the Criminal Code, those in Division 103 of the Criminal Code at least require that the funds have some connection with the engagement of a ‘terrorist act’.

That is why the amendment is structured as it is.

Question put:

That the amendment (Senator Nettle’s) be agreed to.