Supplementary submission: Inquiry into extremist movements and radicalism in Australia
The supplementary submission to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security relates to the Law Council’s responses to the following questions taken on notice at the public hearing of 30 April 2021:
- a possible ‘watch-list’ of individuals connected with ideologically motivated violent extremism, which is de-coupled from the criminal law – Senator the Hon Kristina Keneally sought the Law Council’s views on mechanisms outside of the criminal law to publicly denounce and warn the public about extremist views espoused by particular entities, or those who disseminate or facilitate the dissemination of such views on particular communications platforms. A public facing official ‘watch list’ was identified as one potential mechanism to give effect to that intent;
- the statutory listing (‘proscription’) of individuals – Senator Keneally also sought the Law Council’s views about the possible extension of the listing regime for terrorist organisations in Division 102 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) (Criminal Code) to individuals, such as ‘lone wolf’ actors who are broadly inspired by an extremist ideology, but do not act in the name of an organised group which advocates or engages in violence to further a coherent ideology. It was noted that New Zealand’s ‘designated terrorist entity regime’ in the Terrorism Suppression Act 2002 (NZ) enables the listing of individuals. In August 2020, the Prime Minister of New Zealand exercised power under that Act to list the perpetrator of the 2019 Christchurch attacks, Mr Brenton Harrison Tarrant, after the High Court of New Zealand sentenced him to life imprisonment following his convictions for multiple murder, attempted murder and terrorism offences; and
- defining and regulating ‘online hate speech’ in the context of violent ideological extremism – Dr Anne Aly MP sought the views of the Law Council about potential enhancements to the regulation of hate speech online, including a possible approach to defining the content constituting ‘hate speech’ in this context.
You can read the full submission below.