Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/54342
Title: Guiding Light Or Opaque Filter?: The Minister's Guidelines For The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation In Performing Its Functions And Exercising Its Powers As Relevant To Security
Contributor(s): Carne, Greg  (author)orcid 
Publication Date: 2022
Handle Link: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/54342
Abstract: 

The issue in 2020 of new ministerial guidelines ('2020 Guidelines') for the performance by the Australian Security Intelligence Organisa-tion ('ASIO') of its functions and the exercise of its powers as relevant to security, after a 13-year interval, is significant as very substantial changes in ASIO's legislation, powers, resources and priorities occurred during that time.

The 2020 Guidelines reveal critical new issues in their review processes, content and operation. These issues should be addressed if the Guidelines are to achieve optimal, integrated and complementary performance as one of several ASIO accountability mechanisms, in turn part of minis-terial responsibility under the chosen Australian parliamentary model of human rights.

There are several pressing reform issues in the 2020 Guidelines, including: the need to improve consultative processes for review and development to match the expanding reach of ASIO security activities; the fact that the 2020 Guidelines authorise classified ASIO policies and thereby provide insufficient public guidance; and, the capacity of the 2020 Guidelines to interpretively enlarge the concept of relevance to security and, in particular, broaden the concept of politically motivated violence.

Further important issues and reforms arise from the treatment by the 2020 Guidelines of exiting or remediating the intelligence gathering process, including the collation and retention of personal information, as well a need to more clearly shape proportionality matters in familiar legal principles. Noticeable deficiencies in the 2020 Guidelines give cause for concern and reflection. Specific and broader reforms to the processes generating, and the content informing, the Guidelines are canvassed throughout the article and in its conclusion. These reforms are intended to improve the presently understated function of the 2020 Guidelines as part of a more integrated and responsive ASIO accountability framework.

Publication Type: Journal Article
Source of Publication: Adelaide Law Review, 43(2), p. 814-856
Publisher: Adelaide Law Review Association
Place of Publication: Australia
ISSN: 0065-1915
Fields of Research (FoR) 2008: 180114 Human Rights Law
180108 Constitutional Law
180119 Law and Society
Fields of Research (FoR) 2020: 480307 International humanitarian and human rights law
480702 Constitutional law
480703 Domestic human rights law
Socio-Economic Objective (SEO) 2008: 810105 Intelligence
810107 National Security
940405 Law Reform
Socio-Economic Objective (SEO) 2020: 140105 Intelligence, surveillance and space
140109 National security
230405 Law reform
Peer Reviewed: Yes
HERDC Category Description: C1 Refereed Article in a Scholarly Journal
Publisher/associated links: https://law.adelaide.edu.au/adelaide-law-review
Appears in Collections:Journal Article
School of Law

Files in This Item:
1 files
File SizeFormat 
openpublished/GuidingCarne2022JournalArticle.pdf1.05 MBAdobe PDF
Download Adobe
View/Open
Show full item record
Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in Research UNE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.