URGENT ACTION
Protest new Army 'shoot to kill' powers
No increase to defence spending
The Federal Government is "consulting" the community about the future for
the military including increased defence spending. But, the discussion
paper Defence Review 2000 - Our Future Defence Force, which supposedly
reflects the governments plan for the military, makes no mention of
sweeping new legal powers for the military to suppress civil dissent.
Under the pretext of Olympic Security, the Defence Legislation Amendment
(Aid to the Civilian Authorities) Bill, currently before the Senate, seeks
to establish the legal and political basis for using troops to suppress
political disturbances, including industrial disputes and political
protest. (see more info below)
So far the Government claims its careful managed consultation has elicted
support for increased defence spending. It is vital that people attend this
Melbourne consultation and support increased social spending not defence
spending and oppose the new martial powers before the Senate.
Protest outside and make your views heard inside
3.30pm, August 22
Community Consultation Public meeting
Kaleide Theatre
RMIT, 360 Swanston St
Melbourne
For more information call:
Damien Lawson 0418 140 387
Shelly Marshall 0408 357 882
--
Army's sweeping powers spark civil liberties fears
Sydney Morning Herald August 2000
By TONI O'LOUGHLIN
The defence forces are set to receive sweeping new policing powers as
Sydney gears up its security to host the Olympics and Melbourne prepares
for protests at the World Economic Forum next month.
Under the Defence Legislation Amendment (Aid to the Civilian Authorities)
Bill 2000, which may be passed with the support of Labor in the Senate next
week, the defence personnel will be allowed to use "reasonable and
necessary" force to suppress civilian disorder that State police forces are
incapable of controlling.
Defence forces will be allowed to enter buildings, cordon off areas like
blocks of a city, erect barricades and stop transport to search, seize and
detain people and property.
The bill also allows defence forces to use lethal force where they have
"reasonable grounds" to believe such action is necessary to protect life or
prevent serious injury to themselves or another person.
And despite the restrictions on using reserve troops during industrial
conflict, the bill allows regular defence forces to be "called out" to deal
with strikes.
The Federal Government wants to pass the legislation in time to aid Olympic
security preparations, but a spokesman for the NSW Police Minister, Mr
Whelan, could not say whether the new powers would be called upon.
The bill could be passed as early as next week after the Senate Foreign
Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee reports on it.
If passed, the legislation would be ready for the mass anti-globalisation
protest - called S11 - which will blockade Crown Casino where the World
Economic Forum will be held on September 11.
However, a spokesman for the Victorian Police Commissioner, Mr Neil Comrie,
said there were no plans to utilise the defence forces' new powers during S11.
"At the World Economic Forum we are looking at a large number of protesters
[but] we can manage that ourselves," he said.
The Government and Labor claim the legislation is crucial for combating
terrorism, and that it merely codifies existing practices.
But critics of the legislation argue it will allow the Federal and State
governments to "call out" defence forces to suppress political protests
like strikes and demonstrations.
Greens Senator Bob Brown said the "these sweeping new powers are unwarranted".
"I will be investigating ways of amending the bill to make sure the
Commonwealth Government cannot use troops in relation to peaceful protests
or industrial disputes," he said.
The problem is that the bill does not define the "domestic violence" the
defence forces are meant to quell.
Mr Warwick Johnson, a barrister and former member of the army, told the
Senate committee: "The proposed amendments are mainly directed at
terrorists and like activities, but are not limited and extend to such
anti-social behaviour as amounts to 'domestic violence'.
"When does something that starts off as an innocent protest and turns
nasty, become 'domestic violence'?" he said.
A community legal educator at Melbourne's Western Suburbs Legal Service, Mr
Damien Lawson, said "domestic violence" was "so undefined that it's really
a political decision of the Government of the day as to whether they think
they can get away with using troops".
"Under the pretext of ensuring public safety during the Olympics the
Government and ... Labor have rushed through legislation which will
permanently and fundamentally change the military's role," Mr Lawson said.
--
TROOPS IN THE STREETS?
AUSTRALIAN MILITARY TO GET SWEEPING NEW POWERS
With no media attention or public discussion the Howard Government is using
the Olympics to justify sweeping new powers allowing the military to
suppress domestic unrest in Australia.
The Defence Legislation Amendment (Aid to the Civilian Authorities) Bill
seeks to establish the legal and political basis for using troops to
suppress political disturbances, seriously undermining the centuries-old
principle that the armed forces should not be mobilised against the
civilian population.
The Bill was passed through the House of Representatives in one day (June
28) virtually unnoticed with the country in the grip of GST mania, and is
due to be voted on in the Senate by the end of August in time for the
Olympic Games.
Under the pretext of ensuring public safety during the Olympics, the
government and the Labor Opposition have combined to rush through the
legislation which will permanently and fundamentally change the military's
role.
The Bill authorises the Prime Minister, the Defence Minister and the
Attorney-General to advise the Governor-General (the Commander-in-Chief of
the armed forces under the Constitution) to call out military personnel to
deal with "domestic violence" that is considered a threat to the nation or
one of Australia's states or territories.
The words "domestic violence" do not refer to violence against family
members or in the home. It is a vague and undefined expression derived from
s.119 of the Constitution, which was intended to cover civilian disorder
that the state police forces prove incapable of putting down.
Today, the term "domestic violence" is widely interpreted to mean more than
just "terrorism" and can include strikes, political demonstrations or
riots. Already the term "terrorism" has been used by police and security
forces to encompass protests such as those planned for the World Economic
Forum in Melbourne in September. It is possible that "domestic violence"
will be interpreted to include protests at the Olympics or the WEF.
Section 119 of the Consititution provides that the federal government shall
protect each state against domestic violence, but only on the application
of the state's government. Section 51A of the Bill goes well beyond the
existing s. 51 of the Defence Act 1903 (Cth), which is based on s. 119 of
the Constitution. The new section will allow a military callout where the
three ministers are satisfied that domestic violence is occurring "or is
likely to occur" that will affect "Commonwealth interests" (also
undefined), regardless of whether there is a request by any state or
territory government.
Section 51B retains an existing proviso in s. 51 that a state government
cannot request reserve forces for use in an intervention to deal with an
industrial dispute, but no such restriction applies to the use of the armed
forces to protect Commonwealth interests. Nor is there a restriction on the
use of the permanent military when requested by a State. Section 51G will
prevent military personnel being utilised to "stop or restrict any lawful
protest or dissent" but that limitation is for all practical purposes
meaningless. Almost any political demonstration can be rendered "unlawful"
by refusal of official permission (such as NSW's new Olympic security
legislation).
Once deployed, the military forces will have wide-ranging powers under
Sections 51I to 51Y to seize premises, places and means of transport;
detain people; search premises; and seize things. If the three ministers
declare a "general security area" these powers will be expanded to provide
for wider searches, including personal searches; the erection of barriers;
and the stopping of means of transport. If a "designated area" is declared,
the powers will increase further to stop and control movement; and issue
directions to people.
The most disturbing measures, however, are those contained in Section 51T
on the use of "reasonable and necessary force". In essence, the section
will allow military personnel to shoot to kill. They will be permitted to
cause death or grievous bodily harm where they believe "on reasonable
grounds" that such action is necessary to protect the life of, or prevent
serious injury to, another person, including the military personnel.
Both the government and the Labor Party have claimed that the Bill merely
codifies the law that already exists. But the purpose of this section is to
shield military personnel from actions or prosecution for assault, false
imprisonment and homicide. As legal commentators have warned, without such
legal protection, soldiers could, for example, face murder charges if they
killed someone in the course of quelling a civil disturbance, even if they
were acting under superior orders.
In recent years, police killings of civilians have become commonplace in a
number of states, with the police authorities invariably claiming that the
killings were required for self-defence. The Bill will see the same power
extended to troops, armed with even more deadly weapons, operating under
conditions of serious domestic unrest.
There are significant questions about the constitutionality of aspects of
the legislation, more importantly, however, the bill will be a further
increase in the para-militarisation of policing in Australia and a
significant further step by the military into domestic politics.
In 1978 the Fraser Government used the pretext of the Hilton Bombing and
counter-terrorism in constructing a new national security apparatus based
on extensive intelligence-military-police cooperation. Now the Olympics are
being used as justification for further strengthening of this apparatus and
its grip on civil society. Already the Olympics have been the pretext for
increased funding and resources for the military special forces, sweeping
new phone tapping powers for ASIO and unprecedented powers for police and
security in NSW, this bill if passed will be another significant erosion of
our civil liberties.
(Sections of this leaflet are abridged from a forthcoming article by
Michael Head in the August edition of the Alternative Law Journal).
Act Now
Write, Ring, Fax or Email
John Howard, Parliament House, Canberra, ACT, 2066
Tel: 02 6277 7700, Fax: 02 6273 4100
Kim Beazley, Parliament House, Canberra, ACT 2066
Tel: 02 6277 4022, Fax: 02 6277 8495
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Meg Lees, Senate, Parliament House, Canberra, ACT 2066
Tel: 02 6277 3991, Fax: 02 6277 3996
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Call media contacts, ring talk back and make a noise about this fundamental
threat to our civil liberties.
For more information: Damien Lawson Tel: 0418 140 387
LL.VH
--
Leftlink - Australia's Broad Left Mailing List
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.alexia.net.au/~www/mhutton/index.html
Sponsored by Melbourne's New International Bookshop
Subscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=subscribe%20leftlink
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20leftlink
