The Recent Developments In Governmental Security Services In Australia.

There is no doubting that international terrorism threatens Australia, both as a Western nation and in its own right. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT, 2007) states that “intelligence confirms we were a target before the 11 September 2001 attacks, and we are still a target. Our interests both at home and abroad are in the terrorists' sights.”It is clear that we have to do all we can to prevent terrorism, and security measures are needed to counter this global threat, but since the shocking terrorist attacks in New York and Bali, Australia has introduced more than 20 federal ASIO and "anti-terrorism" laws (Mills, 2005). The implementation of this legislation is certainly a difficult proposition, for how do you counter an enemy who will not show his face? This legislation has inevitably affected our rights but the key question, as a recent paper from the ACT Human Rights Office put it, "is whether the means suggested are proportionate to the legitimate objectives of protecting the Australian community from terrorism" (Grattan, 2005).

Has the threat level increased that much that it warrants such frantic legislating? Or has this legislation been introduced simply as a knee jerk reaction to counter public angst? Whether or not this new legislation is effective in countering the threat of terrorism is of significance and I will examine this further in this essay, but of far greater concern is that key question of whether or not the new laws strike the right balance between ensuring our national security and upholding our important public values and fundamental democratic rights.

The Australian Security Intelligence Organization (ASIO) Amendment Terrorism Bill, unfortunately, does not strike this balance. De Marco (2002) suggests that “along with life and truth, civil liberties are often the first casualty of war” and in this...