David Van (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

The national terrorism threat level was raised to 'probable' in September 2014 and since then there have been nine attacks and 21 major counterterrorism disruption operations in relation to potential attack planning in Australia. Since 2001, 92 people have been convicted of terrorism related offences in Australia, including seven who were juveniles when charged. More than 50 are currently serving custodial sentences and a number of others remain before the courts for terrorism related offences. One need only look back to the horror of the Lindt Cafe attack or the Bourke Street attack in my home state of Victoria to know that these threats are real and present within our society. This is something that the Morrison government takes very, very seriously. It is resolutely committed to pulling every lever of government to protect Australians and prevent the threat of terrorism from occurring on our shores.

It is vital to remember that the security of Australians underpins the recovery of Australia from COVID-19. If our citizens are not safe, they cannot prosper. While COVID-19 has put a halt to many of the norms of our daily lives, the threats against Australians and our communities continue to propagate. For those intent on violence, more time at home spent online meant more time in the echo chamber of the internet on the pathway to radicalisation. It was noted by the director-general of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, Mr Mike Burgess:

COVID has reinforced extremist beliefs and narratives about societal collapse and a race war. As a consequence, we are seeing extremists seeking to acquire weapons for self-defence, as well as stockpiling ammunition and provisions.

An ideologically motivated terrorist attack in Australia remains plausible, most likely by a lone actor or small cell rather than a recognised group, and using a knife or a vehicle rather than sophisticated weapons.

As we learnt from the horrific 2019 London Bridge attack and the 2020 Streatham attack in the UK, convicted terrorists can pose a very real and ongoing threat to public safety when they're released back into the community after serving their full jail sentence. In the case of the February 2020 attack in London, Sudesh Amman injured two people before he was shot dead by police officers who had had him under close surveillance. The attacker had been released from prison just 10 days before he carried out the attack. Had this individual not been under close surveillance, it is most likely that many more would have been injured or killed.

Terrorist attacks perpetrated by individuals who have previously been incarcerated on terrorism charges reinforces the complexity of the challenges that prisons around the world face in relation to terrorist offenders. Despite the efforts of correctional officers to deradicalise prisoners, recidivism still occurs. At a fundamental level, recidivism constitutes the continuation of, or a return to, a previous pattern of criminal behaviour. While our correctional officers put a great deal of effort into reducing the rate of recidivism, unfortunately many individuals walk out of prison more radicalised than before they went in. This is why we must have the right rules in place to ensure that if and when recidivism occurs, our fine law enforcement agencies are prepared and can prevent it before our citizens are harmed.

Peter Severin, the former commissioner of New South Wales prisons, spoke earlier this year to the fact that some of Australia's most notorious terrorists have not disavowed their extremist beliefs in prison and they remain dangerous as their re-entry into the community looms. Six offenders who were convicted following Operation Pandanus in 2005, which dismantled a terrorist network operating between Sydney and Melbourne, remain in custody in New South Wales and will become eligible for release between now and 2026. If and when these individuals are released, we must ensure that the right framework is in place so that our law enforcement agencies are able to adequately ensure that, when back in the community, these individuals pose no threat to the greater public and that, if they do pose a threat, law enforcement agencies can quickly act upon it.

In 2016, the Australian government introduced the high risk terrorist offender regime into the Commonwealth Criminal Code. This provides for the continuing detention of high risk terrorist offenders who pose an unacceptable risk of committing serious terrorist offences at the end of their custodial sentence. This was a significant step towards keeping our community safe from those that wish to threaten the lives of innocent Australians. The Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (High Risk Terrorist Offenders) Bill 2021 government amendment builds upon the work the coalition government has done so far to make our communities safer. The bill before us will ensure that the risk posed to the community from high-risk terrorist offenders is mitigated, following their release from a custodial sentence. It will do this by creating an extended supervision order, an ESO, for high-risk terrorist offenders who are released into the community. This will ensure they are subject to supervision and monitoring conditions which are proportionate to the level of risk they pose to community safety. The new scheme will ensure public safety is the No. 1 priority for our courts when making decisions about the release of high-risk offenders. Under an extended supervision order, the court may impose any conditions that it is satisfied are reasonably necessary and reasonably appropriate for the purpose of protecting the community from the unacceptable risk of the offender committing a serious terrorism offence.

The extended supervision order scheme will complement the existing continuing detention order scheme in the Criminal Code Act 1995 and will broaden the range of tools available to protect the community from terrorist offenders. Currently, there are only two options for managing such offenders. The first is a continuing detention order, under which a court may order that the person remain detained, where they pose an unacceptable risk to the community and where that risk cannot be addressed through less restrictive means. The second option is a control order, which allows conditions to be placed on a person in the community. These orders are not tailored for the post-sentence context as they only allow for a defined set of conditions and are issued by different courts to continuing detention orders. In creating extended supervision orders, the bill will broaden the range of measures available to address the risk of terrorism to the Australian community. The government has put in place robust legal frameworks to provide agencies with appropriate powers, including control orders, preventive detention orders and emergency 'stop, search and seize' powers. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security has recently reported, following its consideration of these powers, and recommended that they be continued. The Australian community rightly expect that their government will do everything within its power to prevent individuals who have a proven track record of causing harm, or who have had intentions to cause harm, from further threatening the community when they get out of jail. This improved scheme delivers on our commitment to keep Australians safe.

The bill also amends other legislation to support the effective implementation of the extended supervision order scheme. To ensure the compliance of an offender on an extended supervision order, the bill amends the Crimes Act 1914 to extend the existing regime of monitoring warrants for control orders to also include supervision orders and interim supervision orders. These amendments will allow law enforcement to monitor the compliance of an offender, either with their consent or with a warrant to search their premises or person. Amendments to the Surveillance Devices Act 2004 and the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 will allow law enforcement to obtain warrants for electronic surveillance to monitor compliance with supervision orders and inform the minister's decision as to whether to apply for a post-sentence order. The bill also amends the international production order regime, which was introduced through the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (International Production Orders) Bill 2020, allowing for improved cross-border access to communications data for law enforcement agencies. These amendments will ensure that agencies are able to obtain international production orders for the purpose of monitoring compliance with extended supervision orders.

The bill amends the National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004 to extend existing provisions which apply to control order proceedings, to allow the court to consider sensitive information in extended supervision order proceedings without that information being disclosed to the offender or their legal representative. This will ensure that the process of applying for an extended supervision order does not reveal sensitive sources— which is of the utmost importance in a custodial environment. To ensure that the offender receives a fair hearing the bill extends the existing special advocate regime that is in place for controlled order proceedings. The bill expressly prohibits the court from considering court-only evidence in determining whether to make continuing detention orders, as is currently the case.

The government amendments also address recommendations by the PJCIS in relation to the bill. The government accepted 10 of the 11 PJCIS recommendations in full, in part or in principle. In the context of the recent New Zealand terror incident and the operational need for the ESO scheme to manage high-risk terrorist offenders it is essential that this bill be passed. The bill ensures that our law enforcement agencies have the powers they need to respond to the evolving threat of terrorism and reflects the government's continued commitment to keeping Australian communities safe and secure. This bill demonstrates the Morrison government's commitment to providing holistic protection against the threat of terrorist activity. This will ensure that our communities remain safe and will address any gaps in the current legislative framework that may allow malicious individuals to cause harm. I commend the bill to the Senate.