The use and abuse of power and why we need a Bill of Rights: the ASIO (Terrorism) Amendment Act 2003 (Cth) and the case of R v Ul-Haque

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

This paper assesses the legislative changes contained in the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2003 (Cth) and their effects, in light of the recent case of R v UI-Haque. The author argues that this case is significant for a number of reasons: first, it illustrates the extent to which the new powers are open to abuse by ASIO officers. Second, it argues that those powers erode the fundamental legal principles of a democratic state, including the right to silence, the right to adequate legal representation and most importantly, the right of habeas corpus. Third, on the basis of a comparison between the interviews conducted by ASIO and those conducted by the Australian Federal Police, the case demonstrates why it is inappropriate for ASIO to wield detention and interrogation powers. Finally, the author suggests that the case highlights the growing need for a statutory bill of rights on at least two grounds: to ensure that rights are protected at law and to promote civics education.
LanguageEnglish
Pages400-429
Number of pages30
JournalMonash University law review
Volume34
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2008
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

bill
amendment
terrorism
act
federal police
intelligence
abuse
legislation
Law
interview
abuse of power
education

Cite this

@article{6838a5832ee949979abe104f0e044ca5,
title = "The use and abuse of power and why we need a Bill of Rights: the ASIO (Terrorism) Amendment Act 2003 (Cth) and the case of R v Ul-Haque",
abstract = "This paper assesses the legislative changes contained in the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2003 (Cth) and their effects, in light of the recent case of R v UI-Haque. The author argues that this case is significant for a number of reasons: first, it illustrates the extent to which the new powers are open to abuse by ASIO officers. Second, it argues that those powers erode the fundamental legal principles of a democratic state, including the right to silence, the right to adequate legal representation and most importantly, the right of habeas corpus. Third, on the basis of a comparison between the interviews conducted by ASIO and those conducted by the Australian Federal Police, the case demonstrates why it is inappropriate for ASIO to wield detention and interrogation powers. Finally, the author suggests that the case highlights the growing need for a statutory bill of rights on at least two grounds: to ensure that rights are protected at law and to promote civics education.",
author = "Sarah Sorial",
year = "2008",
language = "English",
volume = "34",
pages = "400--429",
journal = "Monash University law review",
issn = "0311-3140",
publisher = "Monash University Publishing",
number = "2",

}

The use and abuse of power and why we need a Bill of Rights : the ASIO (Terrorism) Amendment Act 2003 (Cth) and the case of R v Ul-Haque. / Sorial, Sarah.

In: Monash University law review, Vol. 34, No. 2, 2008, p. 400-429.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The use and abuse of power and why we need a Bill of Rights

T2 - Monash University law review

AU - Sorial, Sarah

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - This paper assesses the legislative changes contained in the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2003 (Cth) and their effects, in light of the recent case of R v UI-Haque. The author argues that this case is significant for a number of reasons: first, it illustrates the extent to which the new powers are open to abuse by ASIO officers. Second, it argues that those powers erode the fundamental legal principles of a democratic state, including the right to silence, the right to adequate legal representation and most importantly, the right of habeas corpus. Third, on the basis of a comparison between the interviews conducted by ASIO and those conducted by the Australian Federal Police, the case demonstrates why it is inappropriate for ASIO to wield detention and interrogation powers. Finally, the author suggests that the case highlights the growing need for a statutory bill of rights on at least two grounds: to ensure that rights are protected at law and to promote civics education.

AB - This paper assesses the legislative changes contained in the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2003 (Cth) and their effects, in light of the recent case of R v UI-Haque. The author argues that this case is significant for a number of reasons: first, it illustrates the extent to which the new powers are open to abuse by ASIO officers. Second, it argues that those powers erode the fundamental legal principles of a democratic state, including the right to silence, the right to adequate legal representation and most importantly, the right of habeas corpus. Third, on the basis of a comparison between the interviews conducted by ASIO and those conducted by the Australian Federal Police, the case demonstrates why it is inappropriate for ASIO to wield detention and interrogation powers. Finally, the author suggests that the case highlights the growing need for a statutory bill of rights on at least two grounds: to ensure that rights are protected at law and to promote civics education.

M3 - Article

VL - 34

SP - 400

EP - 429

JO - Monash University law review

JF - Monash University law review

SN - 0311-3140

IS - 2

ER -