Australia anti-terror laws go too far, former judge says

[JURIST] A former Australian federal judge has offered scathing criticism on the country's newly approved anti-terror laws [JURIST document], saying the measures could lead to the growth of a police state. Former federal court Judge Marcus Einfeld [Claxton Speakers profile] said the legislation eroded human rights in Australia [JURIST news archive] and questioned how much Australians should give up for increased security. Einfeld's comments came during a symposium [event preview] Monday at the University of Western Sydney [official website]. The laws, which were passed in December [JURIST report], allow police to detain terror suspects for up to two weeks without charge and gives police greater search and seizure powers.

Anti-terror legislation has drawn skepticism from jurists around the world over its impact on human rights. Most recently, a panel of the International Commission of Jurists [official website] questioned the Australian laws [ABC News report] and the amount of authority that they give to intelligence agencies. Similar legislation in the UK has raised questions [JURIST report] about oversight by an independent judiciary, and a new anti-terror law under consideration has suffered a setback [JURIST report] over detention of terror suspects without charge. The Sydney Morning Herald has more.

ALSO ON JURIST

 Op-ed: Strengthening Counter-Terrorism Laws in Australia [Australian Attorney-General Philip Ruddock]

 

About Paper Chase

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible format.

© Copyright JURIST Legal News and Research Services, Inc., 2013.