Remedying the Past or Losing International Human Rights in Translation? - 'Comprehensive' Responses to Australian National Security Legislation Reviews

Abstract

In December 2008, the Commonwealth Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, tabled Government responses to the recommendations made by four counter-terrorism reviews, which examined controversial national security matters arising during the tenure of the previous Howard government. Two of those reviews were by independent reviewers: the Clarke Inquiry into the case of Dr Mohamed Haneef and the Australian Law Reform Commission ('ALRC') Review of Sedition Laws in Australia. The other two reviews were the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security ('PJCIS') Inquiry into the proscription of 'terrorist organisations' under the Australian Criminal Code and the PJCIS Review of Security and Counter-Terrorism Legislation. The Attorney-General announced that there would be 'comprehensive' legislative and other responses to these reviews. Subsequently, the Attorney-General released a discussion paper, described as a 'comprehensive discussion paper', on proposed national security legislative amendments. The release of the Discussion Paper was linked explicitly to the four national security legislation reviews referred to above.