Bill
Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (High Risk Terrorist Offenders) Bill 2021
passed, as at 2021-12-08. Attorney-General portfolio.
- Sponsor
- Not recorded
- Portfolio
- Attorney-General
Recorded stages
- introduced — 2020-09-03
- second reading — 2020-09-03
- second reading — 2021-10-19
- second reading — 2021-10-19
- committee — 2021-10-19
- third reading — 2021-10-19
- introduced — 2021-10-21
- second reading — 2021-10-21
- second reading — 2021-11-22
- second reading — 2021-11-22
- third reading — 2021-11-22
- passed — 2021-11-22
- royal assent — 2021-12-08
Divisions
- The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2021-11-22.164.1) to the usual [second reading motion](https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/bills-and-laws/making-a-law-in-the-australian-parliament/), which would have added the words below to the usual second reading motion "*that [the bill](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6593) be read for a second time*" (parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill). The amendment was introduced by Victorian Senator [Lidia Thorpe](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/victoria/lidia_thorpe) (Greens). ### Error in Hansard There appears to be a mix up in the Hansard record between this division and [the division](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/divisions/senate/2021-11-22/4) on the [Security Legislation Amendment (Critical Infrastructure) Bill 2021](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6657). This amendment was about critical infrastructure, which is part of that other bill. ### Amendment text > *At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate notes that:* > > *(a) this bill is not supported by key stakeholders in the logistics, technology, and education sectors, among others;* > > *(b) in the review of this bill undertaken by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, numerous stakeholders reported insufficient consultation by the Government with their respective sector or industry and many reported that this bill would result in the imposition of an excessive regulatory burden on their business, including the potential duplication of regulatory systems;* > > *(c) this bill imposes very serious obligations on entities deemed to be providing critical infrastructure, including:* > >> *(i) the potential for the takeover of business or operations by Government security agencies, and* >> >> *(ii) the ab — 2021-11-22, Senate: negative, ayes 7, noes 29
- Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (High Risk Terrorist Offenders) Bill 2021 - Second Reading - Agree with bill's main idea — 2021-11-22, Senate: affirmative, ayes 30, noes 7
Plain-language summary
Written by a model from the explanatory memorandum; not the record, as at 2020-09-03.
This bill would add a new type of court order for managing convicted terrorists after their prison terms end, alongside the existing continuing detention order (CDO) scheme.
Under the proposed extended supervision order (ESO) scheme, a State or Territory Supreme Court could impose conditions on an offender when it is not satisfied that continued imprisonment is needed, using the lower evidence standard of 'the balance of probabilities'.
The bill would also let ESOs and control orders start while a person is held in non-prison custody, such as immigration detention, and would make these orders the only alternatives a Supreme Court may consider when deciding if a less restrictive measure than a CDO would work.
- It creates the ESO scheme in Division 105A of the Criminal Code.
- It allows Supreme Courts to impose ESOs as a less restrictive alternative to CDOs.
- It makes ESOs and control orders available to people in non-prison custody, including immigration detention.
- It restricts Supreme Courts to considering only ESOs and control orders as less restrictive measures to a CDO.
- It amends several related laws, including the Criminal Code and the National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004.
Convicted terrorist offenders who may still pose a risk when their prison sentence ends, and the State and Territory Supreme Courts that would decide on these orders.
Sources
em
em supp
em revised
billhome
frl act