SECURITY AND THE LAW ASSIGNMENT Essay Example
Security and the Law Assignment
Table of Contents
The term “terrorism” comes from a Latin word that means “to unleash terror”. Ideally, the phrase “terror cimbricus” was commonly used by the ancient Romans in 105BC to explain their fright as they faced their fierce opponent. “Terrorism” was later used by Maximilien Robespierre during the French Revolution when he literally ‘terrorised’ the French (Laqueur, 2001). The term has continued to carry similar meaning to date.
Yes, it does, especially if used ineffectively. Language is both a construction tool as well as a destruction tool. The political elites in the country are known to use language ineffectively to the extent that triggers animosities between any two groups hence threatening national security. Many politicians deviate away from political correctness, hence failing to match words with meaning. This might threaten national security (Chomsky, & Otero, 2004).
If a politician wants to advance their motive, they’ll use language to make their opponent and supporters look bad. Many a times, they care less about the impacts of their language use as long as they advance their own motives (Chomsky, & Otero, 2004). A good example is when a politician in support of communism insults their capitalist opponent claiming they are “robbers”.
In the event that security related legislation tramples on fundamental rights and freedoms, most governments excuse themselves on the basis that the rights of an individual or a small group of terrorists should not supersede the safety of the entire nation (Steiner, H.J. et al., 2008). Most governments argue that if given a chance, terrorists will not hesitate to kill several people in their quest to threaten national security, and their rights should not be a cause for their impunity to thrive (Steiner, H.J. et al., 2008). In my opinion, this makes sense. Most governments are facing insecurity issues simply because they’re restricted from punishing the perpetrators on the account of human rights violation.
Changes on when the police can preventatively detain a person
The role of Australian Security Intelligence Organisations (ASIO) in questioning and detaining
Clarifications on the financing of terrorism
Clarifications on the terms: ‘Terrorist Act’, ‘Terrorism Organisation’, and ‘A Terrorist’
They have been triggered by the fact that matters of terrorism have for the longest time been misunderstood by respective governments hence leading to even more terrorism threats. A clarification and proper legislation was necessary in order to provide a clear-cut distinction (Conms, 2006).
The power to arrest a suspect
The power to use reasonable force when arresting a suspect
The power to enforce rules when on duty (Sarre, & Prenzler, 2009)
No. Private security license only allows one to carry out private security operations, without necessarily having a gun license. In the event that they need guns, they are at liberty to apply for a gun license just like any other person who needs to own guns. The two, therefore, are not similar (Hogg & Brown, 1998).
Any person who would like to obtain a private security license should have a clean criminal record. This would mean that such an applicant should not have any pending or previous criminal case. It is assumed that a bad criminal record may suggest that such a person is likely to use the private security license to commit crime (Nemeth, 2012).
No, there isn’t. This is because every nation has its own specifications of what requirements a private security license applicant should meet. There is no single body that is mandated to provide an internationally recognised private security license (Nemeth, 2012); hence no such license does exist.
Security and Related Activities (Control) Act 1996
Security and Related Activities (Control) Regulations 1997(Western Australia Police, 2015)
One becomes a private security agent by first of all ensuring they meet the basic eligibility criteria for a private security license as required by the laws of the land. Thereafter, they can undergo a National Police Check where their fingerprints can be taken. In order to demonstrate competency in the private security for which they wish to apply for licensing, the applicant is required to undergo relevant training. Finally, they will be required to hand in two written references confirming their suitability in matters private security (Scott, & Bergin, 1997).
Australian Security Industry Association Limited (ASIAL) issues domestic security licenses. In addition, it offers help and advice to its members who are primarily domestic security agents (In Walby, K., In Lippert, R., & Palgrave Connect (Online service), (2014).
The relationship between private security agents and ASIO agents is such that while the ASIO agents are tasked with collecting and analysing intelligence information regarding security threats against Australians at home, the private security agents are responsible for enforcing such findings and providing private security to Australians in various private capacities. It is important to note, however, that while the ASIO agents do not arrest, the private security agents are allowed to arrest under the ‘Citizens Arrest’ powers (Hocking, 2003).
The Al Qaeda is a real threat to Australia’s interests. The major reason is the existing close links between Australia and its Western allies such as United States and United Kingdom who are primarily Al Qaeda’s long-time enemies (Silber, 2012).
Australia’s extradition process is governed by the Extradition Act 1988. The following rules are taken into account:
Australian extradition requests can only be made by the Attorney-General or the Minister for Justice (the Minister)
Australia is able to make an extradition request to any country
Countries defined as an ‘extradition country’ in Australian legislation can make an extradition request to Australia (Shearer, 1971; Australia, 2005)
Foreign nationals accused of terrorism offences in Australia are supposedly required to be stripped off their citizenship if they had dual citizenship. If they were purely foreign nationals, they are required to be deported (Lynch, McGarrity, & Williams, 2015).
When Australian citizens are detained by foreign States on suspicion of national security offences, Australia has powers to apply for an extradition for the convicts as stipulated in the Extradition Act of 1988 (Australia, 2005).
While the visa policy for entering the USA might not necessarily have changed, its screening procedures in the process of applying for a visa have been made stringent and thorough. In addition, even stricter administrative procedures have been implemented at the US border for any foreign national entering the country (Alden, 2008).
The procedures of entering Australia have significantly changed with the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) agents having to thoroughly conduct intensive security screening of unauthorised arrivals in the country (Gleeson, 2014).
This is because Australia’s security organisations have been dwelling more on providing private security at the expense of the overall national security. For that reason, terrorist organisations have taken an advantage to expand their base and implement their evil intensions (Shearman & McDougall, 2006).
In enhancing national security, Australia has recently developed the National Facial Biometric Matching Capability (NFBMC) in which various authorised agencies will be able to intelligibly share and match photographs of Australians held in existing databases with the police. Due to such technological advancements, therefore, it’s expected that security processes will be treated with the urgency that they deserve (Lehto & Neittaanmäki, 2015).
Private security agents use technology by using such electronic systems as Electronic Alarm Systems, Passive Infra-Red Detectors (PIRS), Closed Circuit Television (CCTV), and Photo Electric Beams. In the course of their operations, such devices are quite common as they improve efficiency of security management as well as expedite security processes (Maggio, 2009).
There should indeed be further changes to Australia’s national security legislation especially in relation to the fundamental rights and freedoms of the dual citizens who have been convicted on terrorism grounds. As it is, such suspects are usually demeaned and their rights literally taken away from them (Conte, 2010). Instead of helping to quell the threat of terrorism, such treatments only go a long way in accelerating the situation.
There have been indeed effective changes in aircraft security within Australia since 2001. This is evident through the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 which stipulates strategies for screening passengers and checked baggage. In late 2007, the Australian Government set in place a comprehensive review of its Aviation Security Screening for which it was recommended that checked baggage be screened both for domestic flights as well as international flights (Haines, 2007).
Federal and state laws govern operations of private security officers. Most private security officers were formerly federal government police officers in Australia (Sarre, & Prenzler, 2009). Federal law also deliberates on how Australian citizens should be handled by any security personnel in Australia, private security personnel included (Enright, 2001).
Alden, E. (2008). The Closing of the American Border: Terrorism, Immigration, and Security Since 9/11 (New York: Harper.)
Australia. (2005). A new extradition system: A review of Australia’s extradition law and practice. Barton, ACT: Attorney-General’s Dept.
Conms, C.C., (2006). Terrorism in the Twenty-First Century, 4th Edit., New Jersey, Prentice Hall.
Conte, A. (2010). Human rights in the prevention and punishment of terrorism: Commonwealth approaches : United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Berlin: Springer.
Chomsky, N., & Otero, C. P. (2004). Language and politics. Oakland, Calif: AK Press.
Enright, C. (2001). Federal administrative law. Annandale, N.S.W: Federation Press.
Gleeson, K. (2014). Australia’s ‘war on terror’ discourse.
Haines, F. (2007). The Paradox of Regulation: What Regulation Can Achieve and What it Cannot. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pub.
Hocking, J. (2003). Terror laws: ASIO, counter terrorism and the threat to democracy. Sydney: UNSW Press.
Hogg, R & Brown, D., (1998). Rethinking Law and Order. Annandale: Pluto Press.
In Lehto, M., & In Neittaanmäki, P. (2015). Cyber security: Analytics, technology and automation.
In Walby, K., In Lippert, R., & Palgrave Connect (Online service). (2014). Corporate security in the 21st century: Theory and practice in international perspective.
Laqueur, W. (2004). Voices of Terror, Manifestos, writings and manuals of Al Qaeda, Hamas, and other terrorists from around the world and throughout the ages. Canada, Reed Press.
Laqueur, W. (2001). A history of terrorism. New Brunswick, N.J: Transaction.
Lynch, A., McGarrity, N., & Williams, G. (2015). Inside Australia’s anti-terrorism laws and trials.
Maggio, E. J. (2009). Private security in the 21st century: Concepts and applications. Sudbury, Mass: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
Nemeth, C. P. (2012). Private security and the law. Burlington: Elsevier Science.
Sarre, R., & Prenzler, T. (2009). The law of private security in Australia. Rozelle, N.S.W: Thomson Reuters.
Scott, S. V., & Bergin, A. (1997). International law and Australian security. Canberra: Australian Defence Studies Centre.
Shearer, I. A. (1971). Extradition in international law. Manchester [u.a.: Univ. Press.
Shearman, P., & McDougall, D. (2006). Australian security after 9/11: New and old agendas. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
Silber, M. D. (2012). The Al Qaeda factor: Plots against the West. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Simonsen, C.E., & Spindlove, J.R., (2007). Terrorism Today, The Past, The Players, The Future, 3rd Edit New Jersey, Prentice Hall.
Steiner, H.J. et al., (2008). International Human Rights in Context, Law, Politics, Morals., 3rd Edit., Oxford, Oxford University Press.
More Important Things