As discussed on Media Watch this week, the substance of the legislation is really scary. The SMH explains one provision thus:
Imprison for up to five years any suspected `terrorist sympathisers' who refuse to volunteer `highly relevant' information, fail to answer questions accurately or to produce documents or other requested items.
So, if you refuse to talk, they'll gaol you. If you honestly don't know what they think you know, they'll probably gaol you for that too - you've got to be able to prove that you don't know it. That's seriously screwed up logic and makes a mockery of the whole "innocent until proven guilty" concept.
You will have access to a lawyer of your choice but ASIO will be able to prevent you from using 'particular lawyers'. Does that mean they'll give you a choice from three that they like?
As some have pointed out, this legislation goes further than anything
implemented by the US or the UK. As I said above, the question of why our current
laws aren't good enough hasn't been answered. Labor, you're shooting
yourself in the foot here - just because Howard wants you to play his
stupid game doesn't mean you have to.
Posted by david at June 18, 2003 9:28 PM