| Terror laws: Extreme laws an attack on what we hold dear |
It's time for the government to focus less on anti-terrorism measures and more on a very real domestic issue.
We are constantly reminded of overseas terrorist events and being put in fear of terrorism so that we will approve and applaud new and even tougher laws to combat the thing we fear, but we need to keep a sense of proportion.
The government has flagged its intention to extend the use of control orders to children as young as 14.
The effect of a control order may range from house arrest without access to electronic communications, to a restriction on the people you can associate with. The order can remain in effect for up to 12 months.
It can be obtained in a secret hearing about which the subject knows nothing at all, until they are arrested and served with the order. And even then they are not to be told what the evidence was that was used against them.
So if someone made a mistake, the subject of the order won't know and they can't find out because they are not allowed to see the evidence that was used against them.
Mistaken identity now assumes seriously dangerous possibilities to members of the Australian public.
The idea that a 14-year-old could be subject to house arrest for 12 months, based on secret evidence in a secret hearing, is impossible to reconcile with the values and principles which, until recently, were regarded as basic to this country's character and identity.
The potential for injustice is very great. Ironically, the simple fact that a person is the subject of such an order is likely to radicalise them, or their friends who learn about the order. Because isn't this country supposed to regard freedom and justice as core principles?
But what is most objectionable, in my view, is that control orders are just one element of a formidable array of measures which are said to protect our way of life against terrorism.
Now, make no mistake about this, I do not approve of terrorism, but our emphasis on terrorism looks very much like a political strategy: it has been recognised for a long time that a sure path to political popularity is to make the public fearful and then offer them safety.
Terrorism is the perfect device for this strategy. The attack on America on September 11, 2001 made the game easy in Western democracies.
I detest violence of any sort, no matter what its causes or purpose. And I detest political opportunism. We heard a lot about the ISIS "death cult" from Tony Abbott. It seemed to be a successful strategy.
We are constantly reminded of overseas terrorist events. We are forever being put in fear of terrorism, so that we will approve and applaud new and even tougher laws to combat the thing we fear.
But we need to keep a sense of proportion: our local anti-terror legislation will only have an effect on local terror attacks. Australian laws are not likely to deter terrorists in other countries.
So, what is the scale of the problem which is said to provide a reason to trash our basic freedoms? On the most generous view of the figures, the average death toll in Australia from terrorist events is a bit less than one person per year.
The largest ever death toll from any terrorist event in Australia's history was 26. That was at the Eureka Stockade in 1854.
By contrast, two women die each week as a result of domestic violence. The risk of a woman dying in Australia as a result of domestic violence is one hundred times greater than her risk of dying in a terror attack.
Deaths which result from domestic violence make the terrorist death toll pale into insignificance. A woman who has genuine reasons to fear domestic violence is unlikely to get much help from the police, and certainly would not get a control order, since domestic violence is not a terrorist event, no matter how terrified the potential victim is; no matter how justified her fears are.
It's time for our politicians to stop pushing the terrorism button and start concentrating genuinely on a much larger threat to people – women – who live in Australia and who face a far greater risk than terrorism.
It's time for politicians to recognise that our anti-terror legislation is already more draconian than the scale of the problem justifies. It's time for them to think about devoting much-needed resources to a real problem, even if it does not promise them much political benefit.
Australia has some of the most extreme anti-terror legislation in the world. As it is brought to bear on 14-year-olds, we should reflect on the fact that our society – with its assumptions of freedom and justice – is less threatened by terrorism than it is by laws like these.
Julian Burnside is a prominent refugee advocate and human rights lawyer.
| HAVE YOUR SAY!!! - What do you think about this story? Tell us here. |
|
