Skip to Navigation
Skip to Content

Justice System

A Bill of Rights would protect and guarantee the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of all Australians, and bring us into compliance with international human rights standards.

Many Australian laws urgently need reform to ensure freedom of expression and association, freedom from arbitrary detention, legal due process, and privacy, all of which were severely compromised by Australia's 'counter-terrorism legislation and sedition laws. The Australian Greens support the appointment of a Reviewer of Terrorism Laws to begin the root and branch reform of these laws to ensure that all decisions affecting human rights in Australia are necessary, proportionate, consistent with international human rights law, and imposed in a transparent and accountable manner.

The Australian Greens support the role of the International Criminal Court and all United Nations Human Rights Conventions including their protocols, and oppose the death penalty in all cases.

Dr Haneef deserves unreserved apology: Greens

Media Release | Spokesperson Scott Ludlam
Tuesday 23rd December 2008, 11:46am

The Australian Greens today called for an unreserved apology to Dr Mohamed Haneef from the Australian Government, former Prime Minister Howard and the Ministers who were involved in the bungled international episode.

"The report of the inquiry due to be handed down today is expected to show what was obvious from the start - an innocent man was wrongly detained and deported, and his treatment by the Australian Government throughout the whole affair was a failure of our legal, ethical and moral standards," said Senator Scott Ludlam.

Funding of Legal Aid

Estimates Transcripts | Spokesperson Scott Ludlam
Friday 5th December 2008, 3:28pm

SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS
ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S DEPARTMENT
Output 1.7
Question No. 61

Senator Ludlam asked the following question at the hearing on 20 October 2008:

In the course of the introduction and amendment of more than 40 pieces of legislation relating to terrorism and terror-related offences, the AFP, State Police, ASIO and other related agencies received additional funds to enforce the legislation and prosecute various cases.

a) Is the Department aware of the additional burdens placed on community legal services and centres as a consequence of the application of these laws?

b) Does the Department have any estimates of the degree to which the application of the terrorism-related laws have placed additional burdens on community legal centres, and

c) Has legal aid funding been similarly resourced to meet the increased need of ensuring people's right to representation in these and other cases? Is such resourcing under consideration by the Department?

Question on Community Legal Centres

Estimates Transcripts | Spokesperson Scott Ludlam
Friday 5th December 2008, 3:18pm

SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS
ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S DEPARTMENT
Output 1.7
Question No. 63

Senator Ludlam asked the following question at the hearing on 20 October 2008:

In relation to community legal centres:

a) regarding the makeup of State and Federal funding for community legal centres, has there been a declining Federal contribution as compared to the States, at the same time there has been an increased demand on these services

b) regarding the arbitrary distinctions created when the Commonwealth will only pay for commonwealth law matters, and States pick up costs for State matters, will there be a review of this Federal State break down, and

c) are you aware of the comparison between Australia and the rest of the OECD regarding spending per capita on the provision of legal aid? Can you provide a comparison?

Question on Legal Aid

Estimates Transcripts | Spokesperson Scott Ludlam
Thursday 4th December 2008, 5:44pm

SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS
ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S DEPARTMENT
Output 1.7
Question No. 62

Senator Ludlam asked the following question at the hearing on 20 October 2008:

In response to the April 2008 Review of the Commonwealth Community Legal Services Programme, it is understood that new funding models are under consideration.

a) Can you identify whether this review will look at funding models which:

i. increase the minimum base line funding;

ii. ensure that new funding goes to highest needs areas, and;

iii. evaluate ways to address areas with little or no services.

b) When is it anticipated that this assessment will be complete?

c) On what basis is a needs assessment being done?

Questions on AUSTRAC

Estimates Transcripts | Spokesperson Scott Ludlam
Thursday 4th December 2008, 5:30pm

SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS
AUSTRAC
Question No. 103
Senator Ludlam asked the following question at the hearing on 20 October 2008:

In relation to the new Anti-Money Laundering laws:

a) what effect have the new laws had on small operators who provide remittance services to particular sectors of the Australian community (eg remittance to Somalia, to Pakistan) and whose activities are therefore likely to come under scrutiny, and

b) have resources been allocated to educating/supporting these operators?

Question to ASIO

Estimates Transcripts | Spokesperson Scott Ludlam
Thursday 4th December 2008, 5:03pm

QUESTION TO ASIO

SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS
AUSTRALIAN SECURITY INTELLIGENCE ORGANISATION

Question No. 100

Senator Ludlam asked the following question at the hearing on 20 October 2008:

In addition to the use of its formal powers of questioning under the Act in order to gain
intelligence relating to terrorist offences, ASIO undertakes many informal interviews.

a) How are these budgeted for and on what basis are priorities set in this area?

b) How does ASIO determine that a person is "of interest" in relation to anti-terrorism intelligence?

c) What steps are taken to make sure that activity in this area respects the rights that individuals would have in the formal process, especially in the post ul-Haque environment?

Attourney General’s Communication Strategy

Estimates Transcripts | Spokesperson Scott Ludlam
Thursday 4th December 2008, 4:52pm

SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS
ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S DEPARTMENT
Output 2.3
Question No. 66

Senator Ludlam asked the following question at the hearing on 20 October 2008:

In September 2007 the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security recommended that "the Attorney-General's Department develop a communication strategy that is responsive to the specific information needs of ethnic and religious communities":

a) has the Department begun implementing this recommendation

b) what sorts of resources have been allocated to this end? How have priorities been determined? Which communities/agencies/outside bodies have been involved in setting those priorities, and

c) the same report "recommends that the Attorney-General's Department be responsible for the publication of comprehensive data on the application of terrorism laws." Has anything been done in response to this recommendation?

Government must show cards on anti-terrorism review

Media Release | Spokesperson Scott Ludlam
Friday 21st November 2008, 12:00pm

The Australian Greens are calling on the Federal government to commit to an independent review into Howard's heavy-handed anti-terrorism laws, following the Australian Federal Police's (AFP) decision to discontinue David Hicks' control order, and the release of the Haneef Inquiry report today.

"Now that the AFP has decided to stop their heavy-handed treatment of David Hicks and John Clarke QC has concluded his review of the Haneef case, the ball is squarely in the government's court. Every Australian needs to be assured that their civil liberties will be restored - it's an issue for us all," said the Greens Attorney General Spokesperson, Senator Scott Ludlam.

Hicks case shows need for anti-terrorism review

Media Release | Spokesperson Scott Ludlam
Thursday 20th November 2008, 2:35pm

The public gagging of David Hicks should be ended and Howard's heavy-handed anti-terrorism laws reviewed, according to Australian Greens Attorney General Spokesperson, Senator Scott Ludlam.

Former Guantanamo Bay detainee David Hicks today told members of online lobby group, Get Up that he is fearful a new control order will be imposed on him by the Australian Federal Police, and this will prevent him from being able to move forward in his life.

"Control orders are an infringement of basic human rights and incompatible with Australia's broader democratic culture," Senator Ludlam said.

Greens call to review Terrorism Laws

Media Release | Spokesperson Scott Ludlam
Thursday 13th November 2008, 1:48pm

The Australian Greens will defend the rights and freedoms of Australian citizens today, by supporting a review of the Howard government's anti-terrorism laws.

"When the former government pushed through a suite of anti-terrorism laws it failed to provide for review, to ensure the laws were working and not infringing on the rights and freedoms of Australians. Today the Greens want to remedy this," said the Greens Attorney Generals Spokesperson, Senator Scott Ludlam.

Syndicate content