Penny Wright (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I move Greens' amendments (4) to (8) on sheet 7594 together:

(4) Schedule 1, item 21, page 7 (lines 17 to 19), omit subsection 22A(1), substitute:

(1) The Minister may, on request under subsection (2), suspend for up to 48 hours all Australian travel documents that have been issued to a person.

  (1A) The Minister may, on request under subsection (2A), extend a suspension under subsection (1) for an additional period of 48 hours.

  (1B) The Minister may extend a suspension under subsection (1) more than once, but must not do so if the extension would result in the total length of the suspension being longer than 7 days.

(5) Schedule 1, item 21, page 7 (line 20), omit "ASIO", substitute "An officer of ASIO".

(6) Schedule 1, item 21, page 7 (line 21), omit "if it suspects", substitute "if the officer suspects".

(7) Schedule 1, item 21, page 7 (after line 28), after subsection 22A(2), insert:

  (2A) While the Australian travel documents issued to a person are suspended under subsection (1), an officer of ASIO may request the Minister to extend the suspension if the officer suspects on reasonable grounds that:

  (a) the person may leave Australia to engage in conduct referred to in paragraph (2)(a); and

  (b) it is necessary to extend the suspension in order to prevent the person from engaging in the conduct.

(8) Schedule 1, item 21, page 8 (lines 1 to 5), omit subsection 22A(3), substitute:

(3) If an Australian travel document of a person has been suspended under subsection (1), an officer of ASIO must not make another request under subsection (2) relating to the person unless the grounds for the officer's suspicion mentioned in subsection (2) include information ASIO obtained after the end of the suspension.

Note: Subsection (3) does not prevent a request for a suspension to be extended under subsection (2A) being made during the suspension.

As I indicated before, there are some concerns about the bill and, indeed, even with the amendments that have just been passed with the bill. These concerns have led the Australian Greens to recommend that the new powers be amended to provide for an initial suspension period of a maximum of 48 hours, which could be extended by further suspensions of up to 48 hours at a time for a maximum period of seven days; to remove the power for the Minister for Foreign Affairs to delegate his or her passport suspension powers; and to make it clear that a request to suspend a travel document must be made by an individual ASIO officer, so as to ensure appropriate oversight of relevant processes by the inspector-general. The expert advice which we have relied upon in supporting the position that we have brought, in terms of moving these amendments, are recommendations that have been made previously by the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, Law Council of Australia, the Gilbert and Tobin Centre of Public Law and the Castan Centre for Human Rights Law.

I would like to address a question to the Attorney-General in relation to the effects of the bill. The proposed new powers to suspend travel documents have the potential to seriously disrupt people's lives, particularly those who need to travel as a matter of urgency—for example, to visit a dying relative or to secure a business deal. My question is: will there be redress for those who have their travel document suspended under these powers, but are later found not to be a risk to Australia's national security, as the bill does not currently provide for that possibility occurring?