{ "entity_id": "B-003035", "folder": "Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor", "name": "Independent National Security Legislation Monitor", "type": "Statutory Body", "jurisdiction": "Commonwealth", "portfolio": "Attorney-General's", "website": "https://www.inslm.gov.au/", "data_status": "partial", "completeness": { "has_strategy_brief": false, "has_strategy_structured": true, "has_vision": false, "has_kpi_targets": false, "has_kpi_results": false, "has_strategy_overview": true, "has_legislation_text": true, "has_legislation_structured": false, "has_global_initiatives_text": false, "has_ideas": true, "has_artifacts": true, "n_ideas": 12, "n_legislation": 0, "n_artifacts": 2, "n_kpi_targets": 0, "n_kpi_results": 0, "n_outcomes": 0, "verified_own_data": true }, "strategy_profile": { "status": "needs_review", "confidence": "medium", "summary": "", "official_site_url": "https://www.inslm.gov.au/", "source_documents": [ { "type": "annual_report", "title": "Annual Report", "url": "https://web.archive.org.au/awa/20240317003732mp_/https://www.inslm.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-12/INSLM-annual-report-2022-23.pdf", "period": "2024", "confidence": "high" } ], "purpose": null, "vision": null, "strategic_priorities": [], "values": [], "outcomes": [], "performance_measures": [], "document_alignment_terms": { "must_support": [], "watch_terms": [], "avoid_claiming_without_evidence": [] }, "review_note": "Structured strategy exists but is incomplete." }, "strategy_brief_md": null, "strategy_overview_evidence_md": null, "internal_strategy_evidence_md": "# Independent National Security Legislation Monitor - Strategy, Performance, and Operating Profile\n\n**Generated at**: 2026-05-09T22:11:43.819977+00:00\n**Entity ID**: B-003035\n**Entity type**: Statutory Body\n**Jurisdiction**: Commonwealth\n**Portfolio**: Attorney-General's\n**Website**: https://www.inslm.gov.au/\n\n> Draft generated from scraped source material. Treat this as an evidence pack for editorial review, not a final judgement.\n\n## Source Coverage\n\n| Source type | Count |\n|---|---:|\n| other-pdfs | 1 |\n| pages | 4 |\n\n## Executive Readout\n\n### Purpose\n\n- The terrorist purpose element should be consistent with the formulation\nused in the international instruments, in particular the Terrorism Financing Convention\nand UN Security Council resolution 1566 (2004)38\n▲ as good practice ‘a savings clause that specifically excludes non-violent acts not intended\nto cause grave outcomes such as death or serious bodily injury’.39\n1.32 In March 2025 Professor Ben Saul, the current Special Rapporteur, identified 3 key elements to the\ndefinition of terrorism and 3 desirable exceptions, summarised as:\n▲ a specific intent to ‘intimidate a population, or to compel a government or an international\norganization to do or to abstain from doing any act’\n▲ harm that is intend to cause death or serious injury, including where it also qualifies as an\noffence under an international counterterrorism instrument (those instruments don’t cover\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- The 1979 ASIO Act definition of terrorism was linked to the idea of violence for\na political objective, hijacking aircraft and attacks on heads of State and certain other internationally\nprotected persons:\n‘terrorism’ includes—\n(a) acts of violence for the purpose of achieving a political objective in Australia or in a\nforeign country (including acts of violence for the purpose of influencing the policy or\nacts of a government in Australia or in a foreign country);\n(b) training, planning, preparations or other activities for the purposes of violent subversion\nin a foreign country or for the purposes of the commission in a foreign country of other\nacts of violence of a kind referred to in paragraph (a);\n(c) acts that are offences punishable under the Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons)\nAct 1976; or\n11 See, eg, Criminal Code ss 82.9 (preparing for or planning sabotage offence); 91.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Terrorist purpose\n4.4 The intention of a perpetrator is what distinguishes terrorism from other serious crimes that have a\nsimilar physical outcome including murder, assault and serious property damage.196\n‘Terrorism, and the threat of terrorism, is about generating ‘a psychological impact\nbeyond the immediate victims’ and the ‘communication of a message that would not\notherwise be heard (were it not for the violence)’.197\n4.5 To establish a ‘terrorist purpose’ it is necessary to prove the action is done, or threat made, with the\nintention of:\n(i) coercing, or influencing by intimidation, the government of the Commonwealth or a\nState, Territory or foreign country, or of part of a State, Territory or foreign country; or\n(ii) intimidating the public or a section of the public.198\n4.6 The ‘terrorist purpose’ element was not included in the proposed definition of a terrorist act when\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- [Page 51]\n49\nthreats to improve clarity.300 The COAG Response instead proposed to change ‘cause’ to ‘cause, or is\nlikely to cause’.301\n4.75 Courts have described the way threat is incorporated into the definition as ‘less than happy’302 but\nhave interpreted the word ‘action’ in the definition to mean an actual or threatened action.303 The\neffect is that courts have to consider whether the threatened action falls within the list of harms, and\nwhether the threat was made with the required terrorist purpose and terrorist motive.304 A threat with\nno consequential harm has been regarded as being of lesser ‘objective seriousness’ for the purpose\nof sentencing,305 although its inclusion in the definition has also been described as reflective of the\nseriousness of the offending.306\n4.76 That the courts have managed to find a workable way of interpreting the inclusion of a threat within the\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n\n### Role and Functions\n\n- Most notably, Security Council Resolution 1566\n(2004), which is broadly similar to the description in article 2 of the International Convention for the\nSuppression of the Financing of Terrorism,28 refers to:\n… criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious\nbodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public\nor in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or\nan international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act, which constitute offences within\nthe scope of and as defined in the international conventions and protocols relating to terrorism…29\n1.24 In 2017 the Security Council said that criminal liability should also attach to attacks intended to destroy\nor disable infrastructure, stating that States should:\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Some\nof the reviews also cited the 2003 bombing of the UN Headquarters in Baghdad as a reason for the\ninclusion of ‘international organisations’, or the UN as a target under the definition.208 In 2014 the\nCouncil of Australian Governments (COAG) supported a recommendation to include reference to UN\nentities in the definition to afford them the same protection as Australian and foreign governments,\nnoting:\nSuch recognition is appropriate, given the international governmental functions performed by these\nagencies, and evidence that UN agencies have been the target of terrorist acts abroad.209\n199 UK see Terrorism Act 2000 (UK) s 1; USA see Title 18 US Code §2331; Canada see Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Resolution 2341 does not define what ‘critical infrastructure’ is, stating\nthat ‘each State determines what constitutes its critical infrastructure’.282 The UN Office of Counter-\nTerrorism and the UN Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate have issued a compendium\nof good practice in relation to the protection of critical infrastructure against terrorist attacks and while\nthey note countries are left with significant discretion in choosing the criteria for identifying which\ninfrastructure satisfies the ‘criticality’ threshold, they have provided some guidance of best practice:\n[critical infrastructure] can be defined, among others, by taking into account the role they play in the\npromotion and protection of human rights (for example, infrastructure that is vital for the functioning\nof healthcare delivery systems; emergency service systems, water and wastewater systems, etc.)\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- 133 See Crimes Act pt IAAA; Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 3; Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) ch 9; Police\nPowers and Responsibilities Regulations 2012 (Qld) sch 9; Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act 2005 (WA) pt 3; Terrorism (Community\nPrevention) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 2.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- See also Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) s 616;\nTerrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (SA) s 27B; Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005 (Tas) s 16(4); Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act\n2005 (WA) s 21F(1); Terrorism (Community Prevention) Act 2003 (Vic) s 21V.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- 298 States and territories that include ‘threat’ are: Northern Territory (Criminal Code Act 1983 (NT) s 50; Terrorism (Emergency Powers) Act 2003\n(NT) s 5); Queensland (Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) s 211); Tasmania (Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005 (Tas) s\n3); Victoria (Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 (Vic) s 4).\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n\n### Strategic Priorities\n\n- [Page 19]\n17\ninvestigations into ideologically motivated violent extremists consisted of nearly half of ASIO’s onshore\npriority counterterrorism caseload.73 Another threat described by security and law enforcement\nagencies around this time was from violent actions by those associated with the ‘sovereign citizen\nmovement’.74\n2.13 In its 2022-23 Annual Report ASIO said that there had been no major counterterrorism disruptions\nand only one attack it described as terrorism; an attack at a property in Wieambilla, Queensland\nthat may have been motivated by a so-called ‘Christian violent extremist ideology’.75 ASIO described\nthe attack as evidence of how terrorism is becoming ‘more difficult to predict’, at the same time\nas extremists were ‘embracing a more diverse range of grievances, including new, variable and\nsometimes hard to define ideologies’.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- The 1979 ASIO Act definition of terrorism was linked to the idea of violence for\na political objective, hijacking aircraft and attacks on heads of State and certain other internationally\nprotected persons:\n‘terrorism’ includes—\n(a) acts of violence for the purpose of achieving a political objective in Australia or in a\nforeign country (including acts of violence for the purpose of influencing the policy or\nacts of a government in Australia or in a foreign country);\n(b) training, planning, preparations or other activities for the purposes of violent subversion\nin a foreign country or for the purposes of the commission in a foreign country of other\nacts of violence of a kind referred to in paragraph (a);\n(c) acts that are offences punishable under the Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons)\nAct 1976; or\n11 See, eg, Criminal Code ss 82.9 (preparing for or planning sabotage offence); 91.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Most notably, Security Council Resolution 1566\n(2004), which is broadly similar to the description in article 2 of the International Convention for the\nSuppression of the Financing of Terrorism,28 refers to:\n… criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious\nbodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public\nor in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or\nan international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act, which constitute offences within\nthe scope of and as defined in the international conventions and protocols relating to terrorism…29\n1.24 In 2017 the Security Council said that criminal liability should also attach to attacks intended to destroy\nor disable infrastructure, stating that States should:\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- He proposed 3 elements to the definition:\n(a) acts committed with the intention of causing death or serious bodily injury, or the taking\nof hostages;\n(b) for the purpose of provoking a state of terror, intimidating a population, or compelling a\nGovernment or international organization to do or abstain from doing any act; and\n(c) constituting offences within the scope of and as defined in the international conventions\nand protocols relating to terrorism.36\n31 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, opened for signature on 16 December 1966, 999 UNTS 171 (entered into force 23 March\n1976) arts 6 and 9 (ICCPR).\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- The terrorist purpose element should be consistent with the formulation\nused in the international instruments, in particular the Terrorism Financing Convention\nand UN Security Council resolution 1566 (2004)38\n▲ as good practice ‘a savings clause that specifically excludes non-violent acts not intended\nto cause grave outcomes such as death or serious bodily injury’.39\n1.32 In March 2025 Professor Ben Saul, the current Special Rapporteur, identified 3 key elements to the\ndefinition of terrorism and 3 desirable exceptions, summarised as:\n▲ a specific intent to ‘intimidate a population, or to compel a government or an international\norganization to do or to abstain from doing any act’\n▲ harm that is intend to cause death or serious injury, including where it also qualifies as an\noffence under an international counterterrorism instrument (those instruments don’t cover\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- In\nits 2016–17 Annual Report, ASIO noted that although extreme right-wing groups in Australia had\nnot engaged in or advocated terrorism, in 2016 a Melbourne-based man became the first person\nmotivated by an extreme right-wing ideology to be charged with terrorism offences.66 In March\n2019, an Australian right-wing extremist conducted a terrorist attack on 2 mosques in Christchurch,\nNew Zealand, killing 51 people.67 This attack has been described as a ‘transition point’ in Australia’s\nterrorism threat environment.68 In its 2018–19 Annual Report, ASIO warned that the threat from the\nextreme right-wing in Australia had increased and would remain an enduring threat, with groups\nbecoming more cohesive and organised.69 By 2020 ASIO was warning that right-wing extremists\nrepresented a ‘serious, increasing and evolving threat to security’, with the Christchurch attack\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- The strategy\noutlines the enduring threats Australia faces from offshore actors, religiously and ideologically\nmotivated violent extremism, and high-risk terrorist offenders, but also outlines emerging challenges\nincluding:\n▲ increased youth engagement with’ violent extremism’\n▲ mixed, unclear and unstable ideologies, including an increasing number of individuals\nradicalised as a result of personal grievances, perceived injustice, conspiracy theories or\nbroad anti-authority views\n▲ the use of digital technologies, including generative artificial intelligence, social media and\nonline gaming.84\n2.19 Initial research of media reports of the past 5 years of what has been described as terrorism-related\nincidents supports these observations, with a high level of involvement by minors and a wide diversity\nin the motivations, methodologies and geographical spread of alleged perpetrators.85\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Intimate-partner violence contributes to more death,\ndisability and illness of Australian women aged 25–44 than any other preventable risk factor.107 In\n2023 there were 157 victims of FDV homicide and related offences in Australia, 14,059 victims of FDV\nrelated sexual assault, and 169 victims of FDV related kidnapping/abductions.108 Some academics\nand commentators use terms such as ‘everyday terrorism’ and ‘intimate terrorism’ to describe this\npervasive form of violence.109 Researchers have also identified correlations between FDV and violent\nextremist activity, including terrorism.110 The ‘incel’ movement advocates violence against women.111\n2.30 Whether these sorts of violent crimes are, or should be, covered by the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ is\nexplored further in Chapters 4 and 5.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Further, Division 103 makes it an\noffence, punishable by up to life imprisonment, for a person to provide or collect funds, or make funds\navailable or collect funds for a person, reckless as to whether the funds will be used to facilitate or\nengage in a terrorist act.124\nAdvocating terrorism\n3.13 Under section 80.2C of the Criminal Code, a person will commit an offence if they advocate the doing\nof a ‘terrorist act’125 and they are reckless as to whether another person will engage in a terrorist act\n(punishable by up to 7 years imprisonment).126 A person will be taken to ‘advocate’ the doing of a\nterrorist act if they:\n▲ counsel, promote, encourage or urge the doing of a terrorist act;\n▲ provide instruction on the doing of a terrorist act; or\n▲ praise the doing of a terrorist act where there is a substantial risk that such praise might\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Terrorist purpose\n4.4 The intention of a perpetrator is what distinguishes terrorism from other serious crimes that have a\nsimilar physical outcome including murder, assault and serious property damage.196\n‘Terrorism, and the threat of terrorism, is about generating ‘a psychological impact\nbeyond the immediate victims’ and the ‘communication of a message that would not\notherwise be heard (were it not for the violence)’.197\n4.5 To establish a ‘terrorist purpose’ it is necessary to prove the action is done, or threat made, with the\nintention of:\n(i) coercing, or influencing by intimidation, the government of the Commonwealth or a\nState, Territory or foreign country, or of part of a State, Territory or foreign country; or\n(ii) intimidating the public or a section of the public.198\n4.6 The ‘terrorist purpose’ element was not included in the proposed definition of a terrorist act when\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n\n## KPIs, Targets, and Where They Are At\n\n- The strategy\noutlines the enduring threats Australia faces from offshore actors, religiously and ideologically\nmotivated violent extremism, and high-risk terrorist offenders, but also outlines emerging challenges\nincluding:\n▲ increased youth engagement with’ violent extremism’\n▲ mixed, unclear and unstable ideologies, including an increasing number of individuals\nradicalised as a result of personal grievances, perceived injustice, conspiracy theories or\nbroad anti-authority views\n▲ the use of digital technologies, including generative artificial intelligence, social media and\nonline gaming.84\n2.19 Initial research of media reports of the past 5 years of what has been described as terrorism-related\nincidents supports these observations, with a high level of involvement by minors and a wide diversity\nin the motivations, methodologies and geographical spread of alleged perpetrators.85\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Some\nof the reviews also cited the 2003 bombing of the UN Headquarters in Baghdad as a reason for the\ninclusion of ‘international organisations’, or the UN as a target under the definition.208 In 2014 the\nCouncil of Australian Governments (COAG) supported a recommendation to include reference to UN\nentities in the definition to afford them the same protection as Australian and foreign governments,\nnoting:\nSuch recognition is appropriate, given the international governmental functions performed by these\nagencies, and evidence that UN agencies have been the target of terrorist acts abroad.209\n199 UK see Terrorism Act 2000 (UK) s 1; USA see Title 18 US Code §2331; Canada see Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- 4.34 Some commentary about terrorism has raised concerns that ‘political and criminal activities are mixed\ntogether in this definition, with the result that acts of radical political dissent may be described and\n241 Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, GA Res 49/60, UN GAOR, 49th sess, 84th plen mtg, UN Doc A/RES/49/60 (9 December 1994),\nannexed Declaration, [3].\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- [pages 42,43]\nout terrorism has raised concerns that ‘political and criminal activities are mixed\ntogether in this definition, with the result that acts of radical political dissent may be described and\n241 Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, GA Res 49/60, UN GAOR, 49th sess, 84th plen mtg, UN Doc A/RES/49/60 (9 December 1994),\nannexed Declaration, [3].\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- [Page 46]\n44\nMixed motives\n4.51 As discussed in Chapter 2, ASIO has warned that there is an increasing threat of violence from those\ninspired by ‘mixed ideologies’ as well as nationalist and racist causes.266 The Counter-Terrorism\nand Violent Extremism Strategy also warns of risks from those radicalised as a result of ‘personal\ngrievance or perceived injustice, conspiracy theories or broad anti-authority views’.267 Not all of these\ndrivers fall within the definition of terrorism: either because they do not have a terrorist purpose\n(coerce government, etc) or a terrorist motive (to advance a political, religious or ideological cause),\nbut some violent individuals will be at least in part motivated by an intention to coerce a government\n(etc) or advance an ideology (etc).\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Resolution 2341 does not define what ‘critical infrastructure’ is, stating\nthat ‘each State determines what constitutes its critical infrastructure’.282 The UN Office of Counter-\nTerrorism and the UN Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate have issued a compendium\nof good practice in relation to the protection of critical infrastructure against terrorist attacks and while\nthey note countries are left with significant discretion in choosing the criteria for identifying which\ninfrastructure satisfies the ‘criticality’ threshold, they have provided some guidance of best practice:\n[critical infrastructure] can be defined, among others, by taking into account the role they play in the\npromotion and protection of human rights (for example, infrastructure that is vital for the functioning\nof healthcare delivery systems; emergency service systems, water and wastewater systems, etc.)\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- 206 The UK introduced ‘international governmental organisation’ as an alternative target under its definition in 2006; the amendment was\n‘required to eliminate the disparity between definitions of terrorism in UK law and the equivalent definitions in various international\nConventions which the UK aims to implement’: Explanatory Notes to the Terrorism Act 2006 (UK) [158].\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- The 1979 ASIO Act definition of terrorism was linked to the idea of violence for\na political objective, hijacking aircraft and attacks on heads of State and certain other internationally\nprotected persons:\n‘terrorism’ includes—\n(a) acts of violence for the purpose of achieving a political objective in Australia or in a\nforeign country (including acts of violence for the purpose of influencing the policy or\nacts of a government in Australia or in a foreign country);\n(b) training, planning, preparations or other activities for the purposes of violent subversion\nin a foreign country or for the purposes of the commission in a foreign country of other\nacts of violence of a kind referred to in paragraph (a);\n(c) acts that are offences punishable under the Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons)\nAct 1976; or\n11 See, eg, Criminal Code ss 82.9 (preparing for or planning sabotage offence); 91.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- 1.14 In March 2002 the Australian Government introduced a package of terrorism Bills18 stating ‘there\nhas been a profound shift in the international security environment’ that meant ‘Australia’s profile\nas a terrorist target has risen and our interests abroad face a higher level of terrorist threat’.19 When\nenacted these Bills created Commonwealth terrorism offences and established a mechanism to\noutlaw terrorist organisations and prevent the financing of terrorism.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Most notably, Security Council Resolution 1566\n(2004), which is broadly similar to the description in article 2 of the International Convention for the\nSuppression of the Financing of Terrorism,28 refers to:\n… criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious\nbodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public\nor in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or\nan international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act, which constitute offences within\nthe scope of and as defined in the international conventions and protocols relating to terrorism…29\n1.24 In 2017 the Security Council said that criminal liability should also attach to attacks intended to destroy\nor disable infrastructure, stating that States should:\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- For example in resolution 1456 (2003), the Security Council adopted a declaration at the\nministerial level, in which it stressed that:\nStates must ensure that any measure taken to combat terrorism comply with all their obligations\nunder international law, and should adopt such measures in accordance with international law, in\nparticular international human rights, refugee, and humanitarian law.32\n1.26 This means that when criminalising and responding to terrorism Australia must ensure offences\nand powers are defined in a way that does not disproportionately limit fundamental rights and\nfreedoms, such as the rights to liberty, fair trial, privacy and non-discrimination and freedom of\nreligion, movement, expression and association and the rights of the child.33 The various powers and\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- He proposed 3 elements to the definition:\n(a) acts committed with the intention of causing death or serious bodily injury, or the taking\nof hostages;\n(b) for the purpose of provoking a state of terror, intimidating a population, or compelling a\nGovernment or international organization to do or abstain from doing any act; and\n(c) constituting offences within the scope of and as defined in the international conventions\nand protocols relating to terrorism.36\n31 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, opened for signature on 16 December 1966, 999 UNTS 171 (entered into force 23 March\n1976) arts 6 and 9 (ICCPR).\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- The terrorist purpose element should be consistent with the formulation\nused in the international instruments, in particular the Terrorism Financing Convention\nand UN Security Council resolution 1566 (2004)38\n▲ as good practice ‘a savings clause that specifically excludes non-violent acts not intended\nto cause grave outcomes such as death or serious bodily injury’.39\n1.32 In March 2025 Professor Ben Saul, the current Special Rapporteur, identified 3 key elements to the\ndefinition of terrorism and 3 desirable exceptions, summarised as:\n▲ a specific intent to ‘intimidate a population, or to compel a government or an international\norganization to do or to abstain from doing any act’\n▲ harm that is intend to cause death or serious injury, including where it also qualifies as an\noffence under an international counterterrorism instrument (those instruments don’t cover\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- In\nits 2016–17 Annual Report, ASIO noted that although extreme right-wing groups in Australia had\nnot engaged in or advocated terrorism, in 2016 a Melbourne-based man became the first person\nmotivated by an extreme right-wing ideology to be charged with terrorism offences.66 In March\n2019, an Australian right-wing extremist conducted a terrorist attack on 2 mosques in Christchurch,\nNew Zealand, killing 51 people.67 This attack has been described as a ‘transition point’ in Australia’s\nterrorism threat environment.68 In its 2018–19 Annual Report, ASIO warned that the threat from the\nextreme right-wing in Australia had increased and would remain an enduring threat, with groups\nbecoming more cohesive and organised.69 By 2020 ASIO was warning that right-wing extremists\nrepresented a ‘serious, increasing and evolving threat to security’, with the Christchurch attack\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n\n## Key Metrics\n\n- [Page 44]\n42\n4.39 Many Australian Muslims feel they have been unfairly singled out by the discourse and practice of\ncounterterrorism.251 The Islamophobia Register Australia has consistently reported disturbingly high\nrates of Islamophobia in Australia, with insults often drawing association between Muslims and\nterrorists.252 In late 2024 the Race Discrimination Commissioner called for a review of counterterrorism\nlaws, policies and practices to investigate their potential discriminatory application and effect.253\n4.40 A different position was taken by COAG a little over 10 years ago (2014) with their review finding that\nretention of the reference to religious motivation does not cast ‘an inappropriate emphasis upon\nproper religious beliefs or activities’ because there is ‘no acceptable justification in the tenets of any\nreligion to warrant the unjustified killing of innocent civilians’.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- The 1979 ASIO Act definition of terrorism was linked to the idea of violence for\na political objective, hijacking aircraft and attacks on heads of State and certain other internationally\nprotected persons:\n‘terrorism’ includes—\n(a) acts of violence for the purpose of achieving a political objective in Australia or in a\nforeign country (including acts of violence for the purpose of influencing the policy or\nacts of a government in Australia or in a foreign country);\n(b) training, planning, preparations or other activities for the purposes of violent subversion\nin a foreign country or for the purposes of the commission in a foreign country of other\nacts of violence of a kind referred to in paragraph (a);\n(c) acts that are offences punishable under the Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons)\nAct 1976; or\n11 See, eg, Criminal Code ss 82.9 (preparing for or planning sabotage offence); 91.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Most notably, Security Council Resolution 1566\n(2004), which is broadly similar to the description in article 2 of the International Convention for the\nSuppression of the Financing of Terrorism,28 refers to:\n… criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious\nbodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public\nor in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or\nan international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act, which constitute offences within\nthe scope of and as defined in the international conventions and protocols relating to terrorism…29\n1.24 In 2017 the Security Council said that criminal liability should also attach to attacks intended to destroy\nor disable infrastructure, stating that States should:\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- He proposed 3 elements to the definition:\n(a) acts committed with the intention of causing death or serious bodily injury, or the taking\nof hostages;\n(b) for the purpose of provoking a state of terror, intimidating a population, or compelling a\nGovernment or international organization to do or abstain from doing any act; and\n(c) constituting offences within the scope of and as defined in the international conventions\nand protocols relating to terrorism.36\n31 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, opened for signature on 16 December 1966, 999 UNTS 171 (entered into force 23 March\n1976) arts 6 and 9 (ICCPR).\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- The terrorist purpose element should be consistent with the formulation\nused in the international instruments, in particular the Terrorism Financing Convention\nand UN Security Council resolution 1566 (2004)38\n▲ as good practice ‘a savings clause that specifically excludes non-violent acts not intended\nto cause grave outcomes such as death or serious bodily injury’.39\n1.32 In March 2025 Professor Ben Saul, the current Special Rapporteur, identified 3 key elements to the\ndefinition of terrorism and 3 desirable exceptions, summarised as:\n▲ a specific intent to ‘intimidate a population, or to compel a government or an international\norganization to do or to abstain from doing any act’\n▲ harm that is intend to cause death or serious injury, including where it also qualifies as an\noffence under an international counterterrorism instrument (those instruments don’t cover\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- In\nits 2016–17 Annual Report, ASIO noted that although extreme right-wing groups in Australia had\nnot engaged in or advocated terrorism, in 2016 a Melbourne-based man became the first person\nmotivated by an extreme right-wing ideology to be charged with terrorism offences.66 In March\n2019, an Australian right-wing extremist conducted a terrorist attack on 2 mosques in Christchurch,\nNew Zealand, killing 51 people.67 This attack has been described as a ‘transition point’ in Australia’s\nterrorism threat environment.68 In its 2018–19 Annual Report, ASIO warned that the threat from the\nextreme right-wing in Australia had increased and would remain an enduring threat, with groups\nbecoming more cohesive and organised.69 By 2020 ASIO was warning that right-wing extremists\nrepresented a ‘serious, increasing and evolving threat to security’, with the Christchurch attack\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- [Page 19]\n17\ninvestigations into ideologically motivated violent extremists consisted of nearly half of ASIO’s onshore\npriority counterterrorism caseload.73 Another threat described by security and law enforcement\nagencies around this time was from violent actions by those associated with the ‘sovereign citizen\nmovement’.74\n2.13 In its 2022-23 Annual Report ASIO said that there had been no major counterterrorism disruptions\nand only one attack it described as terrorism; an attack at a property in Wieambilla, Queensland\nthat may have been motivated by a so-called ‘Christian violent extremist ideology’.75 ASIO described\nthe attack as evidence of how terrorism is becoming ‘more difficult to predict’, at the same time\nas extremists were ‘embracing a more diverse range of grievances, including new, variable and\nsometimes hard to define ideologies’.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- The strategy\noutlines the enduring threats Australia faces from offshore actors, religiously and ideologically\nmotivated violent extremism, and high-risk terrorist offenders, but also outlines emerging challenges\nincluding:\n▲ increased youth engagement with’ violent extremism’\n▲ mixed, unclear and unstable ideologies, including an increasing number of individuals\nradicalised as a result of personal grievances, perceived injustice, conspiracy theories or\nbroad anti-authority views\n▲ the use of digital technologies, including generative artificial intelligence, social media and\nonline gaming.84\n2.19 Initial research of media reports of the past 5 years of what has been described as terrorism-related\nincidents supports these observations, with a high level of involvement by minors and a wide diversity\nin the motivations, methodologies and geographical spread of alleged perpetrators.85\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Intimate-partner violence contributes to more death,\ndisability and illness of Australian women aged 25–44 than any other preventable risk factor.107 In\n2023 there were 157 victims of FDV homicide and related offences in Australia, 14,059 victims of FDV\nrelated sexual assault, and 169 victims of FDV related kidnapping/abductions.108 Some academics\nand commentators use terms such as ‘everyday terrorism’ and ‘intimate terrorism’ to describe this\npervasive form of violence.109 Researchers have also identified correlations between FDV and violent\nextremist activity, including terrorism.110 The ‘incel’ movement advocates violence against women.111\n2.30 Whether these sorts of violent crimes are, or should be, covered by the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ is\nexplored further in Chapters 4 and 5.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Further, Division 103 makes it an\noffence, punishable by up to life imprisonment, for a person to provide or collect funds, or make funds\navailable or collect funds for a person, reckless as to whether the funds will be used to facilitate or\nengage in a terrorist act.124\nAdvocating terrorism\n3.13 Under section 80.2C of the Criminal Code, a person will commit an offence if they advocate the doing\nof a ‘terrorist act’125 and they are reckless as to whether another person will engage in a terrorist act\n(punishable by up to 7 years imprisonment).126 A person will be taken to ‘advocate’ the doing of a\nterrorist act if they:\n▲ counsel, promote, encourage or urge the doing of a terrorist act;\n▲ provide instruction on the doing of a terrorist act; or\n▲ praise the doing of a terrorist act where there is a substantial risk that such praise might\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n\n## Key Achievements\n\n- Following that operation 18 men said to be inspired by al-Qa’ida and similar terrorist\norganisations were convicted for their roles in planning to conduct violent attacks in Australia.46\nAnother major disruption took place in 2009 with Operation Neath, in which 5 men were charged and\n3 convicted in connection with a plan to conduct a mass shooting at the Holsworthy Army Barracks in\nSydney, inspired by al-Qa’ida affiliate al-Shabaab.47\n2.5 By 2012 al-Qa’ida and its affiliates had suffered setbacks through the loss of senior leadership figures\nand regional counterterrorism efforts.48 While such groups continued to aspire to ‘large-scale, centrally\ncoordinated 9/11-style attacks’, ASIO began increasingly to highlight the danger of ‘standalone,\n42 The INSLM Act requires consideration of whether a law remains proportionate to any threat of terrorism or threat to national security or both:\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- 109 See, for example, Rachel Pain and Scottish Women’s Aid, Everyday Terrorism: How Fear Works in Domestic Abuse (Report, Durham\nUniversity, 2012); Rachel Pain, ‘Everyday Terrorism: Connecting Domestic Violence and Global Terrorism’ (2014) 38(4) Progress in Human\nGeography 531; Caron E Gentry, ‘Epistemological Failures: Everyday Terrorism in the West’ (2015) 8(3) Critical Studies in Terrorism 362;\nMichael P Johnson, ‘Conflict and Control: Gender Symmetry and Asymmetry in Domestic Violence’ (2006) 12(11) Violence Against Women\n1003.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- The 1979 ASIO Act definition of terrorism was linked to the idea of violence for\na political objective, hijacking aircraft and attacks on heads of State and certain other internationally\nprotected persons:\n‘terrorism’ includes—\n(a) acts of violence for the purpose of achieving a political objective in Australia or in a\nforeign country (including acts of violence for the purpose of influencing the policy or\nacts of a government in Australia or in a foreign country);\n(b) training, planning, preparations or other activities for the purposes of violent subversion\nin a foreign country or for the purposes of the commission in a foreign country of other\nacts of violence of a kind referred to in paragraph (a);\n(c) acts that are offences punishable under the Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons)\nAct 1976; or\n11 See, eg, Criminal Code ss 82.9 (preparing for or planning sabotage offence); 91.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Most notably, Security Council Resolution 1566\n(2004), which is broadly similar to the description in article 2 of the International Convention for the\nSuppression of the Financing of Terrorism,28 refers to:\n… criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious\nbodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public\nor in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or\nan international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act, which constitute offences within\nthe scope of and as defined in the international conventions and protocols relating to terrorism…29\n1.24 In 2017 the Security Council said that criminal liability should also attach to attacks intended to destroy\nor disable infrastructure, stating that States should:\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- He proposed 3 elements to the definition:\n(a) acts committed with the intention of causing death or serious bodily injury, or the taking\nof hostages;\n(b) for the purpose of provoking a state of terror, intimidating a population, or compelling a\nGovernment or international organization to do or abstain from doing any act; and\n(c) constituting offences within the scope of and as defined in the international conventions\nand protocols relating to terrorism.36\n31 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, opened for signature on 16 December 1966, 999 UNTS 171 (entered into force 23 March\n1976) arts 6 and 9 (ICCPR).\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- The terrorist purpose element should be consistent with the formulation\nused in the international instruments, in particular the Terrorism Financing Convention\nand UN Security Council resolution 1566 (2004)38\n▲ as good practice ‘a savings clause that specifically excludes non-violent acts not intended\nto cause grave outcomes such as death or serious bodily injury’.39\n1.32 In March 2025 Professor Ben Saul, the current Special Rapporteur, identified 3 key elements to the\ndefinition of terrorism and 3 desirable exceptions, summarised as:\n▲ a specific intent to ‘intimidate a population, or to compel a government or an international\norganization to do or to abstain from doing any act’\n▲ harm that is intend to cause death or serious injury, including where it also qualifies as an\noffence under an international counterterrorism instrument (those instruments don’t cover\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- In\nits 2016–17 Annual Report, ASIO noted that although extreme right-wing groups in Australia had\nnot engaged in or advocated terrorism, in 2016 a Melbourne-based man became the first person\nmotivated by an extreme right-wing ideology to be charged with terrorism offences.66 In March\n2019, an Australian right-wing extremist conducted a terrorist attack on 2 mosques in Christchurch,\nNew Zealand, killing 51 people.67 This attack has been described as a ‘transition point’ in Australia’s\nterrorism threat environment.68 In its 2018–19 Annual Report, ASIO warned that the threat from the\nextreme right-wing in Australia had increased and would remain an enduring threat, with groups\nbecoming more cohesive and organised.69 By 2020 ASIO was warning that right-wing extremists\nrepresented a ‘serious, increasing and evolving threat to security’, with the Christchurch attack\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- [Page 19]\n17\ninvestigations into ideologically motivated violent extremists consisted of nearly half of ASIO’s onshore\npriority counterterrorism caseload.73 Another threat described by security and law enforcement\nagencies around this time was from violent actions by those associated with the ‘sovereign citizen\nmovement’.74\n2.13 In its 2022-23 Annual Report ASIO said that there had been no major counterterrorism disruptions\nand only one attack it described as terrorism; an attack at a property in Wieambilla, Queensland\nthat may have been motivated by a so-called ‘Christian violent extremist ideology’.75 ASIO described\nthe attack as evidence of how terrorism is becoming ‘more difficult to predict’, at the same time\nas extremists were ‘embracing a more diverse range of grievances, including new, variable and\nsometimes hard to define ideologies’.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- The strategy\noutlines the enduring threats Australia faces from offshore actors, religiously and ideologically\nmotivated violent extremism, and high-risk terrorist offenders, but also outlines emerging challenges\nincluding:\n▲ increased youth engagement with’ violent extremism’\n▲ mixed, unclear and unstable ideologies, including an increasing number of individuals\nradicalised as a result of personal grievances, perceived injustice, conspiracy theories or\nbroad anti-authority views\n▲ the use of digital technologies, including generative artificial intelligence, social media and\nonline gaming.84\n2.19 Initial research of media reports of the past 5 years of what has been described as terrorism-related\nincidents supports these observations, with a high level of involvement by minors and a wide diversity\nin the motivations, methodologies and geographical spread of alleged perpetrators.85\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Intimate-partner violence contributes to more death,\ndisability and illness of Australian women aged 25–44 than any other preventable risk factor.107 In\n2023 there were 157 victims of FDV homicide and related offences in Australia, 14,059 victims of FDV\nrelated sexual assault, and 169 victims of FDV related kidnapping/abductions.108 Some academics\nand commentators use terms such as ‘everyday terrorism’ and ‘intimate terrorism’ to describe this\npervasive form of violence.109 Researchers have also identified correlations between FDV and violent\nextremist activity, including terrorism.110 The ‘incel’ movement advocates violence against women.111\n2.30 Whether these sorts of violent crimes are, or should be, covered by the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ is\nexplored further in Chapters 4 and 5.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Further, Division 103 makes it an\noffence, punishable by up to life imprisonment, for a person to provide or collect funds, or make funds\navailable or collect funds for a person, reckless as to whether the funds will be used to facilitate or\nengage in a terrorist act.124\nAdvocating terrorism\n3.13 Under section 80.2C of the Criminal Code, a person will commit an offence if they advocate the doing\nof a ‘terrorist act’125 and they are reckless as to whether another person will engage in a terrorist act\n(punishable by up to 7 years imprisonment).126 A person will be taken to ‘advocate’ the doing of a\nterrorist act if they:\n▲ counsel, promote, encourage or urge the doing of a terrorist act;\n▲ provide instruction on the doing of a terrorist act; or\n▲ praise the doing of a terrorist act where there is a substantial risk that such praise might\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Terrorist purpose\n4.4 The intention of a perpetrator is what distinguishes terrorism from other serious crimes that have a\nsimilar physical outcome including murder, assault and serious property damage.196\n‘Terrorism, and the threat of terrorism, is about generating ‘a psychological impact\nbeyond the immediate victims’ and the ‘communication of a message that would not\notherwise be heard (were it not for the violence)’.197\n4.5 To establish a ‘terrorist purpose’ it is necessary to prove the action is done, or threat made, with the\nintention of:\n(i) coercing, or influencing by intimidation, the government of the Commonwealth or a\nState, Territory or foreign country, or of part of a State, Territory or foreign country; or\n(ii) intimidating the public or a section of the public.198\n4.6 The ‘terrorist purpose’ element was not included in the proposed definition of a terrorist act when\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n\n## Key Issues, Risks, and Recommendations\n\n- The strategy\noutlines the enduring threats Australia faces from offshore actors, religiously and ideologically\nmotivated violent extremism, and high-risk terrorist offenders, but also outlines emerging challenges\nincluding:\n▲ increased youth engagement with’ violent extremism’\n▲ mixed, unclear and unstable ideologies, including an increasing number of individuals\nradicalised as a result of personal grievances, perceived injustice, conspiracy theories or\nbroad anti-authority views\n▲ the use of digital technologies, including generative artificial intelligence, social media and\nonline gaming.84\n2.19 Initial research of media reports of the past 5 years of what has been described as terrorism-related\nincidents supports these observations, with a high level of involvement by minors and a wide diversity\nin the motivations, methodologies and geographical spread of alleged perpetrators.85\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- In\nits 2016–17 Annual Report, ASIO noted that although extreme right-wing groups in Australia had\nnot engaged in or advocated terrorism, in 2016 a Melbourne-based man became the first person\nmotivated by an extreme right-wing ideology to be charged with terrorism offences.66 In March\n2019, an Australian right-wing extremist conducted a terrorist attack on 2 mosques in Christchurch,\nNew Zealand, killing 51 people.67 This attack has been described as a ‘transition point’ in Australia’s\nterrorism threat environment.68 In its 2018–19 Annual Report, ASIO warned that the threat from the\nextreme right-wing in Australia had increased and would remain an enduring threat, with groups\nbecoming more cohesive and organised.69 By 2020 ASIO was warning that right-wing extremists\nrepresented a ‘serious, increasing and evolving threat to security’, with the Christchurch attack\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Intimate-partner violence contributes to more death,\ndisability and illness of Australian women aged 25–44 than any other preventable risk factor.107 In\n2023 there were 157 victims of FDV homicide and related offences in Australia, 14,059 victims of FDV\nrelated sexual assault, and 169 victims of FDV related kidnapping/abductions.108 Some academics\nand commentators use terms such as ‘everyday terrorism’ and ‘intimate terrorism’ to describe this\npervasive form of violence.109 Researchers have also identified correlations between FDV and violent\nextremist activity, including terrorism.110 The ‘incel’ movement advocates violence against women.111\n2.30 Whether these sorts of violent crimes are, or should be, covered by the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ is\nexplored further in Chapters 4 and 5.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Further, Division 103 makes it an\noffence, punishable by up to life imprisonment, for a person to provide or collect funds, or make funds\navailable or collect funds for a person, reckless as to whether the funds will be used to facilitate or\nengage in a terrorist act.124\nAdvocating terrorism\n3.13 Under section 80.2C of the Criminal Code, a person will commit an offence if they advocate the doing\nof a ‘terrorist act’125 and they are reckless as to whether another person will engage in a terrorist act\n(punishable by up to 7 years imprisonment).126 A person will be taken to ‘advocate’ the doing of a\nterrorist act if they:\n▲ counsel, promote, encourage or urge the doing of a terrorist act;\n▲ provide instruction on the doing of a terrorist act; or\n▲ praise the doing of a terrorist act where there is a substantial risk that such praise might\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Some\nof the reviews also cited the 2003 bombing of the UN Headquarters in Baghdad as a reason for the\ninclusion of ‘international organisations’, or the UN as a target under the definition.208 In 2014 the\nCouncil of Australian Governments (COAG) supported a recommendation to include reference to UN\nentities in the definition to afford them the same protection as Australian and foreign governments,\nnoting:\nSuch recognition is appropriate, given the international governmental functions performed by these\nagencies, and evidence that UN agencies have been the target of terrorist acts abroad.209\n199 UK see Terrorism Act 2000 (UK) s 1; USA see Title 18 US Code §2331; Canada see Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- [Page 46]\n44\nMixed motives\n4.51 As discussed in Chapter 2, ASIO has warned that there is an increasing threat of violence from those\ninspired by ‘mixed ideologies’ as well as nationalist and racist causes.266 The Counter-Terrorism\nand Violent Extremism Strategy also warns of risks from those radicalised as a result of ‘personal\ngrievance or perceived injustice, conspiracy theories or broad anti-authority views’.267 Not all of these\ndrivers fall within the definition of terrorism: either because they do not have a terrorist purpose\n(coerce government, etc) or a terrorist motive (to advance a political, religious or ideological cause),\nbut some violent individuals will be at least in part motivated by an intention to coerce a government\n(etc) or advance an ideology (etc).\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- The Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills said\nthis scheme ‘fundamentally inverts basic assumptions of the criminal justice system’.172 A former\nMonitor recommended CDOs be abolished and extensive amendments be made in relation to\nESOs.173\n167 Criminal Code Amendment (High Risk Terrorist Offenders) Act 2016 (Cth) and Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (High Risk Terrorist\nOffenders) Act 2021 (Cth).\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- In the cases involving damage to property (often at the prepare and plan phase) the courts have\ngenerally inferred that the act would also likely have endangered life and risked serious harm, including\ndeath, to people in the vicinity.280 Some sentencing judges have stated that they could not be satisfied\nbeyond reasonable doubt that a person accused of prepare and plan offences involving damage to\nproperty also intended to cause a loss of human life, but that such acts ‘very often, perhaps always,\ncarry with it the possibility that human life may be endangered’ or that there could be a ‘slight risk that\nthey might have injured anybody who was walking past the building at the time’.281\n4.64 Even if destroying or disabling critical infrastructure (as opposed to general property or systems) did\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Issues Paper – Review of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995\nIssues paper\nPublication date\n11 August 2025\nHearing\nDefining terrorism: Review of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995\nDownload\nIssues Paper – Review of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 [PDF]\nThe definition of a ‘terrorist act’ under section 100.1 of the\nCriminal Code Act 1995\n(Cth) (\nCriminal Code\n) is an element of a number of serious offences and enlivens a broad range of policing and other powers under Commonwealth, state and territory laws.\n Source: `pages/publications-index.html (https://www.inslm.gov.au/publications/issues-paper-review-definition-terrorist-act-section-1001-criminal-code-act-1995)`\n- [pages 1,2,3]\n[Page 1]\nIndependent National Security\nLegislation Monitor\nDefining\nTerrorism\nIssues Paper\nReview of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in\nsection 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- [Page 3]\nTable of Contents\nIntroduction �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������2\nResponding to the issues paper .........................................................................................................4\nQuestions ..........................................................................................................................................5\nCurrent definition of a ‘terrorist act’ ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������6\nChapter 1: Terrorism as a special category of crime ��������������������������������������������������������������������7\nHistory of the definition of terrorism in Australia ..................................................................................9\nInternational obligations............\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- 37\nHarm caused ..................................................................................................................................45\n‘Threats’ of terrorist action ...............................................................................................................48\nExclusions ........................................................................................................................................49\nChapter 5: Consequences of any change to the definition ��������������������������������������������������������52\nAnnex A: Previous reviews of the definition of a terrorist act �����������������������������������������������������53\nAnnex B Additional resources ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������54\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- [pages 3,4,5]\n.............48\nExclusions ........................................................................................................................................49\nChapter 5: Consequences of any change to the definition ��������������������������������������������������������52\nAnnex A: Previous reviews of the definition of a terrorist act �����������������������������������������������������53\nAnnex B Additional resources ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������54\nAcronyms and abbreviations ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������55\nDefining Terrorism – Issues Paper – Review of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- [pages 8,9,10]\nessential public utility; or\n(vi) a system used for, or by, a transport system.\n(3) Action falls within this subsection if it:\n(a) is advocacy, protest, dissent or industrial action; and\n(b) is not intended:\n(i) to cause serious harm that is physical harm to a person; or\n(ii) to cause a person’s death; or\n(iii) to endanger the life of a person, other than the person taking the action; or\n(iv) to create a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n\n## Corporate Values and Operating Culture\n\n- Further, Division 103 makes it an\noffence, punishable by up to life imprisonment, for a person to provide or collect funds, or make funds\navailable or collect funds for a person, reckless as to whether the funds will be used to facilitate or\nengage in a terrorist act.124\nAdvocating terrorism\n3.13 Under section 80.2C of the Criminal Code, a person will commit an offence if they advocate the doing\nof a ‘terrorist act’125 and they are reckless as to whether another person will engage in a terrorist act\n(punishable by up to 7 years imprisonment).126 A person will be taken to ‘advocate’ the doing of a\nterrorist act if they:\n▲ counsel, promote, encourage or urge the doing of a terrorist act;\n▲ provide instruction on the doing of a terrorist act; or\n▲ praise the doing of a terrorist act where there is a substantial risk that such praise might\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- Resolution 2341 does not define what ‘critical infrastructure’ is, stating\nthat ‘each State determines what constitutes its critical infrastructure’.282 The UN Office of Counter-\nTerrorism and the UN Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate have issued a compendium\nof good practice in relation to the protection of critical infrastructure against terrorist attacks and while\nthey note countries are left with significant discretion in choosing the criteria for identifying which\ninfrastructure satisfies the ‘criticality’ threshold, they have provided some guidance of best practice:\n[critical infrastructure] can be defined, among others, by taking into account the role they play in the\npromotion and protection of human rights (for example, infrastructure that is vital for the functioning\nof healthcare delivery systems; emergency service systems, water and wastewater systems, etc.)\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- [Page 22]\n20\nSome individuals switch between different ideologies or groups (fluid or unstable), merge\ncomponents from different ideologies (mixed or hybrid), or adopt a vague or incoherent ideological\nmix to justify their violence (unclear).96\n2.24 Associated with mixed and unclear ideologies, there also appears to be a high incidence of fixated\npersons and persons with mental illness that may contribute to their extremist behaviour,97 as well\nas conspiracy-fuelled extremism that is reinforced through online interactions with like-minded\nindividuals.98 Associate Professor Emily Corner has observed:\nWe’re seeing the boundaries between lone acts of violent extremism, fixation and sometimes\ndomestic violence and intimate partner homicide, Incel-related violence and hate crimes and\nschool-related crime … blurring. … For a long time, people just said ‘it’s either terrorism or its\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- The new offences include threatening violence or damage to property\n(including places of worship) in relation to a targeted group (distinguished by race, religion, sex, sexual\norientation, gender identity, intersex status, disability, nationality, national or ethnic origin or political\nopinion).101 When introducing the Bill to Parliament, the then Attorney-General noted the Bill responded\nto the ‘increasing prevalence of hate speech and hateful conduct in our society’, which ‘cannot, and\nwill not, be tolerated’, and ‘should be treated as [criminal behaviour].’102\n2.27 Since the October 2023 attacks in Israel, and the subsequent military response, there has been a\nmarked increase in antisemitic and Islamophobic attacks in Australia.103 The majority of these incidents\ninvolved verbal or written intimidation or harassment (including graffiti) but some have involved\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- 97 See ASIO, ASIO Annual Report 2023–24 (Report, 4 October 2024) 4, 6; State Coroner of New South Wales, Inquest into the Deaths Arising\nfrom the Lindt Café Siege: Findings and Recommendations (Report, May 2017) 238–9; Coroner’s Court of Queensland, Inquest into the\nDeaths of Raghe Mohamed Abdi, Zoe Dorothea Antill & Maurice Frederick Antill (Inquest Report, 17 April 2025); Ardavan Koshnood, ‘The\nCorrelation Between Mental Disorders and Terrorism is Weak’ (2017) 41(1) BJPsych Bulletin 56; Kiran M Sarma, Sarah L Carthy and Katie\nM Cox, ‘Mental Disorder, Psychological Problems and Terrorist Behaviour: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis’ 2022 18(3) Campbell\nSystematic Reviews 1; Margot Trumbur et al, ‘Are Radicalization and Terrorism Associated with Psychiatric Disorders?\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- 118 Since the prepare and plan offences for terrorism were introduced, limited other Commonwealth preparatory offences have also been\nintroduced: see Criminal Code s 119.4 (preparations for incursions into foreign countries for engaging in hostile activities); s 272.20 (prepare\nor plan for offences of benefiting from, encouraging or preparing for sexual offences against children outside Australia); s 474.25C (using a\ncarriage service to prepare or plan to cause harm to, engage in sexual activity with, or procure for sexual activity, persons under 16); s 82.9\n(preparing for or planning sabotage offence); s 91.12 (offence of preparing for an espionage offence); s 92.4 (offence of preparing for a foreign\ninterference offence).\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- 142 NSW Police Force, Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 Section 26ZN Annual Report by the New South Wales Police Force (Report,\n23 January 2018); Re Application for a Preventative Detention Order in respect of Causevic [2015] VSC 248.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n- [pages 29,30]\norce, Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 Section 26ZN Annual Report by the New South Wales Police Force (Report,\n23 January 2018); Re Application for a Preventative Detention Order in respect of Causevic [2015] VSC 248.\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)`\n\n## Global Ideas and Case Study Inputs\n\n_No global-intelligence source text found yet. Run `CLAUDE/global-ideas-scraper.py ` to populate case-study sources._\n\n## Source Artifacts Used\n\n- `pages/about.html` - pages - https://www.inslm.gov.au/about\n- `pages/homepage.html` - pages - https://www.inslm.gov.au/\n- `pages/news-latest.html` - pages - https://www.inslm.gov.au/news-and-media\n- `pages/publications-index.html` - pages - https://www.inslm.gov.au/publications/issues-paper-review-definition-terrorist-act-section-1001-criminal-code-act-1995\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf` - other-pdfs - https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf\n\n## Gaps To Fix\n\n- No corporate plan text source found.\n- No annual report text source found.\n- No global comparison/case-study sources found.", "legislation_md": "# Independent National Security Legislation Monitor - Acts and Legislation Discovery\n\n**Generated at**: 2026-05-09T21:04:52.180407+00:00\n**Entity ID**: B-003035\n**Jurisdiction**: Commonwealth\n**Portfolio**: Attorney-General's\n\n> This is an evidence-based discovery list from scraped department material. A mention does not always mean the department administers the legislation; high-confidence and official register links should be reviewed.\n\n## Summary\n\n- Source files scanned: 6\n- Unique legislation references found: 80\n\n| Type | Count |\n|---|---:|\n| Act | 75 |\n| Regulation | 5 |\n\n## Legislation References\n\n### Criminal Code Act 1995\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: high\n**Mentions**: 74\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Criminal+Code+Act+1995\n\n**Sources**:\n- `pages/homepage.html`\n- `pages/publications-index.html`\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- submissions to reviews.\nPlease follow us on\nLinkedIn\nor visit this page regularly for advice about current and future reviews.\nDefining terrorism\nThe Monitor is currently reviewing the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ under Australian law (section 100.1 of the\nCriminal Code Act 1995\n). The Review is considering the operation, effectiveness and implications of the definition, when read in conjunction with associated offences and powers, as well as whether it remains necessary and proportionate to the threat of terrorism.\nSubmissions to th\n Source: `pages/homepage.html`\n- the review\nAustralia's espionage, foreign interference, sabotage and theft of trade secrets offences\nThe Monitor is currently reviewing Australia’s espionage, foreign interference, sabotage and theft of trade secrets offences (Division 82 and Part 5.2 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) (Criminal Code)).\nSubmissions to this review are closed. The Monitor thanks all submitters for their contributions, which are now being considered.\nView the paper\n|\nView submissions\nSLAID response tabled\nThe Government response to the Monitor’s review o\n Source: `pages/homepage.html`\n- Previous Reviews\nReports, submissions and hearing transcripts from previous reviews\nLatest news\nDebate continues over contentious terror law tweaks – The West Australian\n11 March 2026\nSubjects: Definition of a terrorist act, INSLM review, section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995, public hearing.\nReview of terrorism definition – ABC AM\n10 March 2026\nSubjects: Definition of a terrorist act, INSLM review, section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995, public hearing.\nMinority groups call for protection under terror laws – The Canberra Tim\n Source: `pages/homepage.html`\n- 11 March 2026\nSubjects: Definition of a terrorist act, INSLM review, section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995, public hearing.\nReview of terrorism definition – ABC AM\n10 March 2026\nSubjects: Definition of a terrorist act, INSLM review, section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995, public hearing.\nMinority groups call for protection under terror laws – The Canberra Times\n10 March 2026\nSubjects: Definition of a terrorist act, INSLM review, section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995, public hearing.\nAustralia’s definition of Terrorism t\n Source: `pages/homepage.html`\n- of a terrorist act, INSLM review, section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995, public hearing.\nMinority groups call for protection under terror laws – The Canberra Times\n10 March 2026\nSubjects: Definition of a terrorist act, INSLM review, section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995, public hearing.\nAustralia’s definition of Terrorism to be examined in public hearing\n10 March 2026\nAustralia’s definition of a ‘terrorist act’ will be examined by the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor, Mr Jake Blight, at a public hearing in C\n Source: `pages/homepage.html`\n\n### Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: high\n**Mentions**: 9\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Terrorism+%28Police+Powers%29+Act+2002\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- n believe, the person is committing, or has\ncommitted, a terrorism offence137\n▲ use lethal force to respond to declared terrorist incidents with specific protection for the\npolice officer from criminal liability.138\n132 Crimes Act div 3A, subdiv B; Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 2; Public Safety Preservation Act 1986 (Qld) pt 2A; Terrorism\n(Police Powers) Act 2002 (SA) pt 2; Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006 (ACT) pt 3; Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005\n(TAS) pt 2; Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- to respond to declared terrorist incidents with specific protection for the\npolice officer from criminal liability.138\n132 Crimes Act div 3A, subdiv B; Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 2; Public Safety Preservation Act 1986 (Qld) pt 2A; Terrorism\n(Police Powers) Act 2002 (SA) pt 2; Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006 (ACT) pt 3; Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005\n(TAS) pt 2; Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act 2005 (WA) pt 2; Terrorism (Community Prevention) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 3A div 3. As at 30 June\n2024,\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- Commonwealth level and no prescribed security zones had been declared: see annual reports\nmade under s 3UJB of the Crimes Act, available at Department of Home Affairs, ‘Counter Terrorism Powers Annual Report’ (Web Page).\n133 See Crimes Act pt IAAA; Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 3; Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) ch 9; Police\nPowers and Responsibilities Regulations 2012 (Qld) sch 9; Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act 2005 (WA) pt 3; Terrorism (Community\nPrevention) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 2.\n134 See Terrorism (\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- port 9 of 2020 (August 2020) 27–47.\n136 See Ken Lay and David Harper, Report 2: Expert Panel on Terrorism and Violent Extremism Prevention and Response Powers (Report, 2017)\n8 (Harper-Lay Review).\n137 Crimes Act pt IAA, div 4.\n138 See, for example, Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) s 24B. See also Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) s 616;\nTerrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (SA) s 27B; Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005 (Tas) s 16(4); Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act\n2005 (WA) s 21F(1); Terrorism (Community P\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- ent Extremism Prevention and Response Powers (Report, 2017)\n8 (Harper-Lay Review).\n137 Crimes Act pt IAA, div 4.\n138 See, for example, Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) s 24B. See also Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) s 616;\nTerrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (SA) s 27B; Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005 (Tas) s 16(4); Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act\n2005 (WA) s 21F(1); Terrorism (Community Prevention) Act 2003 (Vic) s 21V. In Western Australia, in addition to the powers available where\nthere is suspicio\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: high\n**Mentions**: 8\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Terrorism+%28Community+Protection%29+Act+2003\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- ho a person can associate with, where they can work and if they can access\ntelecommunications (e.g. the internet). Orders can also require a person to undertake treatment or\n139 Criminal Code div 105; Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 2A; Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 2A; Terrorism\n(Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (Qld); Terrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2006 (WA); Terrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (SA);\nTerrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (Tas); Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) A\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- s 105.15 and 105.16.\n141 See, eg, Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) s 26ZK; Terrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (SA) s 42. However, in Victoria, a\nperson may be questioned unless prohibited under the preventative detention order: see Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 (Vic) pt\n2A, div 5A (Questioning).\n142 NSW Police Force, Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 Section 26ZN Annual Report by the New South Wales Police Force (Report,\n23 January 2018); Re Application for a Preventative Detention Order in respect of Causevic [201\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- thway…158\n154 See National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004 (Cth); Criminal Code s 93.2; Foreign Evidence Act 1994 (Cth) pt\n3A as well as state and territory rules such as: Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) ch 6 pt 2B; Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003\n(Vic) pt 5.\n155 See Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, Report 11 of 2020 (24 September 2020) 20–6.\n156 Grant Donaldson, Review into the Operation and Effectiveness of the National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004\n(Rep\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- tion (Report, 4 December 2006) 57 [5.25] (PJCIS Review); COAG Review 21; Attorney-General (ACT), Statutory Review –\nTerrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006 (April 2021) 10; Department of Justice and Community Safety (Vic), Review of the\nTerrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003, Stage Two Report (August 2021) 30. See also Dominique Dalla-Pozza et al, ‘Commonwealth\nReviews Considering the Definition of a “Terrorist Act” in s 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth)’, Independent National Security\nLegislation Monitor (Commissioned Re\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- website.\n231 PJCIS Review 57 [5.25].\n232 COAG Review 21.\n233 Attorney-General (ACT), Statutory Review – Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006 (Report, April 2021) 10.\n234 Department of Justice and Community Safety (Vic), Review of the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003, Stage Two Report (Report,\nAugust 2021) 30.\n235 Department of Justice and Community Safety (Vic), Review of the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003, Stage Two Report (Report,\nAugust 2021) 30.\nDefining Terrorism – Issues Paper – Review of the definition\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: high\n**Mentions**: 5\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Terrorism+%28Extraordinary+Temporary+Powers%29+Act+2006\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- th specific protection for the\npolice officer from criminal liability.138\n132 Crimes Act div 3A, subdiv B; Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 2; Public Safety Preservation Act 1986 (Qld) pt 2A; Terrorism\n(Police Powers) Act 2002 (SA) pt 2; Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006 (ACT) pt 3; Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005\n(TAS) pt 2; Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act 2005 (WA) pt 2; Terrorism (Community Prevention) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 3A div 3. As at 30 June\n2024, these powers had not been used at the Commonwealth level and n\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- m (Community Protection) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 2A; Terrorism\n(Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (Qld); Terrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2006 (WA); Terrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (SA);\nTerrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (Tas); Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006 (ACT) pt 2; Terrorism (Emergency\nPowers) Act 2003 (NT) pt 2B. See also Criminal Code s 101.1, definition of ‘corresponding State preventative detention law’ and Criminal\nCode Regulations 2019 (Cth) s 8.\n140 Criminal Code ss 105.34–105.37 and 105.41. See also\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, Parliament of Australia, Review of Security and Counter\nTerrorism Legislation (Report, 4 December 2006) 57 [5.25] (PJCIS Review); COAG Review 21; Attorney-General (ACT), Statutory Review –\nTerrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006 (April 2021) 10; Department of Justice and Community Safety (Vic), Review of the\nTerrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003, Stage Two Report (August 2021) 30. See also Dominique Dalla-Pozza et al, ‘Commonwealth\nReviews Considering the Definition of a “Terrori\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth)’, Independent National Security\nLegislation Monitor (Commissioned Report, June 2025), available on the INSLM website.\n231 PJCIS Review 57 [5.25].\n232 COAG Review 21.\n233 Attorney-General (ACT), Statutory Review – Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006 (Report, April 2021) 10.\n234 Department of Justice and Community Safety (Vic), Review of the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003, Stage Two Report (Report,\nAugust 2021) 30.\n235 Department of Justice and Community Safety (Vic), Review of the Terrorism (C\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) s 211); Tasmania (Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005 (Tas) s\n3); Victoria (Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 (Vic) s 4). States and territories that exclude ‘threat’ are: Australian Capital Territory\n(Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006 (ACT) s 6); New South Wales (Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) s 3); South\nAustralia (Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2005 (SA) s 2) and Western Australia (Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) 2005 (WA) s 5).\n299 UN Human Rights Council, Report of the Specia\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Terrorism (Community Prevention) Act 2003\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: high\n**Mentions**: 4\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Terrorism+%28Community+Prevention%29+Act+2003\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- Preservation Act 1986 (Qld) pt 2A; Terrorism\n(Police Powers) Act 2002 (SA) pt 2; Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006 (ACT) pt 3; Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005\n(TAS) pt 2; Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act 2005 (WA) pt 2; Terrorism (Community Prevention) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 3A div 3. As at 30 June\n2024, these powers had not been used at the Commonwealth level and no prescribed security zones had been declared: see annual reports\nmade under s 3UJB of the Crimes Act, available at Department of Home Affairs, ‘Counter Terro\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- 133 See Crimes Act pt IAAA; Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 3; Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) ch 9; Police\nPowers and Responsibilities Regulations 2012 (Qld) sch 9; Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act 2005 (WA) pt 3; Terrorism (Community\nPrevention) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 2.\n134 See Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 2AA and Terrorism (Community Prevention) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 2AA.\n135 ASIO Act pt 3, subdiv C. These have been used very sparingly. See concerns raised at the potential length of detention during s\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- 2000 (Qld) ch 9; Police\nPowers and Responsibilities Regulations 2012 (Qld) sch 9; Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act 2005 (WA) pt 3; Terrorism (Community\nPrevention) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 2.\n134 See Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 2AA and Terrorism (Community Prevention) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 2AA.\n135 ASIO Act pt 3, subdiv C. These have been used very sparingly. See concerns raised at the potential length of detention during such\nquestioning: Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, Report 9 of 2020 (August 2020) 27–47.\n136 See Ken\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- s) Act 2002 (NSW) s 24B. See also Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) s 616;\nTerrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (SA) s 27B; Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005 (Tas) s 16(4); Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act\n2005 (WA) s 21F(1); Terrorism (Community Prevention) Act 2003 (Vic) s 21V. In Western Australia, in addition to the powers available where\nthere is suspicion of a ‘terrorist act’, police may access some special powers to respond to a ‘hostile act’. This is defined by reference to\nactions such as a kidnapping, siege, hij\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Terrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2005\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: high\n**Mentions**: 4\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Terrorism+%28Preventative+Detention%29+Act+2005\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- if they can access\ntelecommunications (e.g. the internet). Orders can also require a person to undertake treatment or\n139 Criminal Code div 105; Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 2A; Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 2A; Terrorism\n(Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (Qld); Terrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2006 (WA); Terrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (SA);\nTerrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (Tas); Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006 (ACT) pt 2; Terrorism (Emergency\nPowers) Act 2003\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- take treatment or\n139 Criminal Code div 105; Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 2A; Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 2A; Terrorism\n(Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (Qld); Terrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2006 (WA); Terrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (SA);\nTerrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (Tas); Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006 (ACT) pt 2; Terrorism (Emergency\nPowers) Act 2003 (NT) pt 2B. See also Criminal Code s 101.1, definition of ‘corresponding State preventative detentio\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- rism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 2A; Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 2A; Terrorism\n(Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (Qld); Terrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2006 (WA); Terrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (SA);\nTerrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (Tas); Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006 (ACT) pt 2; Terrorism (Emergency\nPowers) Act 2003 (NT) pt 2B. See also Criminal Code s 101.1, definition of ‘corresponding State preventative detention law’ and Criminal\nCode Regulations 2019 (Cth) s\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- definition of ‘corresponding State preventative detention law’ and Criminal\nCode Regulations 2019 (Cth) s 8.\n140 Criminal Code ss 105.34–105.37 and 105.41. See also ss 105.15 and 105.16.\n141 See, eg, Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) s 26ZK; Terrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2005 (SA) s 42. However, in Victoria, a\nperson may be questioned unless prohibited under the preventative detention order: see Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 (Vic) pt\n2A, div 5A (Questioning).\n142 NSW Police Force, Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 Sec\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: high\n**Mentions**: 3\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Police+Powers+%28Public+Safety%29+Act+2005\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- y.138\n132 Crimes Act div 3A, subdiv B; Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 2; Public Safety Preservation Act 1986 (Qld) pt 2A; Terrorism\n(Police Powers) Act 2002 (SA) pt 2; Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006 (ACT) pt 3; Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005\n(TAS) pt 2; Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act 2005 (WA) pt 2; Terrorism (Community Prevention) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 3A div 3. As at 30 June\n2024, these powers had not been used at the Commonwealth level and no prescribed security zones had been declared: see\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- t, 2017)\n8 (Harper-Lay Review).\n137 Crimes Act pt IAA, div 4.\n138 See, for example, Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) s 24B. See also Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) s 616;\nTerrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (SA) s 27B; Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005 (Tas) s 16(4); Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act\n2005 (WA) s 21F(1); Terrorism (Community Prevention) Act 2003 (Vic) s 21V. In Western Australia, in addition to the powers available where\nthere is suspicion of a ‘terrorist act’, police may access some spec\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- tion 4.\n298 States and territories that include ‘threat’ are: Northern Territory (Criminal Code Act 1983 (NT) s 50; Terrorism (Emergency Powers) Act 2003\n(NT) s 5); Queensland (Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) s 211); Tasmania (Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005 (Tas) s\n3); Victoria (Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 (Vic) s 4). States and territories that exclude ‘threat’ are: Australian Capital Territory\n(Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006 (ACT) s 6); New South Wales (Terrorism (Police Powe\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: high\n**Mentions**: 3\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Police+Powers+and+Responsibilities+Act+2000\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- security zones had been declared: see annual reports\nmade under s 3UJB of the Crimes Act, available at Department of Home Affairs, ‘Counter Terrorism Powers Annual Report’ (Web Page).\n133 See Crimes Act pt IAAA; Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 3; Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) ch 9; Police\nPowers and Responsibilities Regulations 2012 (Qld) sch 9; Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act 2005 (WA) pt 3; Terrorism (Community\nPrevention) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 2.\n134 See Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 2AA and Terrorism (Comm\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- n Lay and David Harper, Report 2: Expert Panel on Terrorism and Violent Extremism Prevention and Response Powers (Report, 2017)\n8 (Harper-Lay Review).\n137 Crimes Act pt IAA, div 4.\n138 See, for example, Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) s 24B. See also Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) s 616;\nTerrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (SA) s 27B; Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005 (Tas) s 16(4); Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act\n2005 (WA) s 21F(1); Terrorism (Community Prevention) Act 2003 (Vic) s 21V. In Western Australia, in addition\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- 296 2012 INSLM Review 120–2; COAG Review 9–10 [39].\n297 COAG Response to recommendation 4.\n298 States and territories that include ‘threat’ are: Northern Territory (Criminal Code Act 1983 (NT) s 50; Terrorism (Emergency Powers) Act 2003\n(NT) s 5); Queensland (Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) s 211); Tasmania (Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005 (Tas) s\n3); Victoria (Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 (Vic) s 4). States and territories that exclude ‘threat’ are: Australian Capital Territory\n(Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Power\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act 2005\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: high\n**Mentions**: 3\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Terrorism+%28Extraordinary+Powers%29+Act+2005\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- m (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 2; Public Safety Preservation Act 1986 (Qld) pt 2A; Terrorism\n(Police Powers) Act 2002 (SA) pt 2; Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Act 2006 (ACT) pt 3; Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005\n(TAS) pt 2; Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act 2005 (WA) pt 2; Terrorism (Community Prevention) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 3A div 3. As at 30 June\n2024, these powers had not been used at the Commonwealth level and no prescribed security zones had been declared: see annual reports\nmade under s 3UJB of the Crimes Act, av\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- ‘Counter Terrorism Powers Annual Report’ (Web Page).\n133 See Crimes Act pt IAAA; Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 3; Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) ch 9; Police\nPowers and Responsibilities Regulations 2012 (Qld) sch 9; Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act 2005 (WA) pt 3; Terrorism (Community\nPrevention) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 2.\n134 See Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) pt 2AA and Terrorism (Community Prevention) Act 2003 (Vic) pt 2AA.\n135 ASIO Act pt 3, subdiv C. These have been used very sparingly. See concerns\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- IAA, div 4.\n138 See, for example, Terrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (NSW) s 24B. See also Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) s 616;\nTerrorism (Police Powers) Act 2002 (SA) s 27B; Police Powers (Public Safety) Act 2005 (Tas) s 16(4); Terrorism (Extraordinary Powers) Act\n2005 (WA) s 21F(1); Terrorism (Community Prevention) Act 2003 (Vic) s 21V. In Western Australia, in addition to the powers available where\nthere is suspicion of a ‘terrorist act’, police may access some special powers to respond to a ‘hostile act’. This is defined\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Terrorism (Temporary Exclusion Orders) Act 2019\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: high\n**Mentions**: 3\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Terrorism+%28Temporary+Exclusion+Orders%29+Act+2019\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- n 104.29 of the Criminal Code and for the 2023–24 financial year, see\nParliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, Parliament of Australia, Annual Report of Committee Activities 2023–2024\n(Report, November 2024) 29 [1.7].\n150 Counter-Terrorism (Temporary Exclusion Orders) Act 2019 (Cth) s 10. See annual reports made under s 31 of the Counter-Terrorism\n(Temporary Exclusion Orders) Act 2019 (Cth), Department of Home Affairs, Submission No 8.1 to Parliamentary Joint Committee on\nIntelligence and Security, Review of the Counter-Terrorism (\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- gence and Security, Parliament of Australia, Annual Report of Committee Activities 2023–2024\n(Report, November 2024) 29 [1.7].\n150 Counter-Terrorism (Temporary Exclusion Orders) Act 2019 (Cth) s 10. See annual reports made under s 31 of the Counter-Terrorism\n(Temporary Exclusion Orders) Act 2019 (Cth), Department of Home Affairs, Submission No 8.1 to Parliamentary Joint Committee on\nIntelligence and Security, Review of the Counter-Terrorism (Temporary Exclusion Orders) Act 2019 (17 October 2022) 9. There does not\nappear to be any public information o\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- (Cth) s 10. See annual reports made under s 31 of the Counter-Terrorism\n(Temporary Exclusion Orders) Act 2019 (Cth), Department of Home Affairs, Submission No 8.1 to Parliamentary Joint Committee on\nIntelligence and Security, Review of the Counter-Terrorism (Temporary Exclusion Orders) Act 2019 (17 October 2022) 9. There does not\nappear to be any public information on the legislative basis on which the ninth temporary exclusion order, made during the 2023–24 financial\nyear, was made.\n151 Crimes Act s 15AA. See also Bail Act 2013 (NSW) s 22A; Bail Ac\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Foreign Fighters) Act 2014\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: high\n**Mentions**: 3\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Terrorism+Legislation+Amendment+%28Foreign+Fighters%29+Act+2014\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- e by imprisonment for 5 years or more and is not an offence\nof attempt, incitement, conspiracy, complicity, joint commission or commission by proxy, see Criminal Code s 80.2C(1)(a)(ii) and (2).\n126 As introduced by the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Foreign Fighters) Act 2014 (Cth), sch 1, item 61.\n127 Note that in accordance with a 2005 Security Council resolution, Australia is under an obligation to prohibit by law ‘incitement to commit a\nterrorist act’, see SC Res 1624, UN Doc S/RES/1624 (14 September 2005) [1(a)]. Incitement i\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- 2018); Re Application for a Preventative Detention Order in respect of Causevic [2015] VSC 248.\n143 Criminal Code s 104.4(1) as inserted by the Anti-Terrorism Act (No 2) 2005 (Cth) sch 4 item 24.\n144 As inserted by the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Foreign Fighters) Act 2014 (Cth) sch 1, item 73 and Counter-Terrorism\nLegislation Amendment Act (No 1) 2014 (Cth) sch 1 item 11.\n145 Criminal Code s 104.4(1)(d).\n146 Criminal Code s 104.28(1), as amended by the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Act (No 1) 2016 (Cth) sch 2 item 30\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- 0.2D,\n474.15–474.16.\n194 See Criminal Code div 119; Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 134B and 202; Australian Passports Act 2005 (Cth) ss 14, 22A; Foreign Passports\n(Law Enforcement and Security) Act 2005 (Cth) ss 15A, 16A; Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Foreign Fighters) Act 2014 (Cth)\nsch 2.\nDefining Terrorism – Issues Paper – Review of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995\n\n[page 36]\n34\nChapter 4: Is the existing definition of\nterrorism appropriate?\n4.1 The definition of a ‘terrorist act’\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 2\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Australian+Security+Intelligence+Organisation+Act+1979\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- at they are properly addressed, nor does it exclude the need for some things\nthat are not terrorism to be the subject of special laws and extraordinary powers.\nHistory of the definition of terrorism in Australia\n1.11 A definition of terrorism was included the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979 (Cth)\n(ASIO Act) in 1979.14 It was part of the definition of ‘security’ and thus ASIO’s mandate to collect and\nanalyse intelligence relevant to security, including through the use of search warrants, listening devices\nand phone interception. The 1979 ASIO Act\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- errorism Legislation, 13 March 2025) 3. A recent UK review found that programs to reduce the risk of violent extremism should\nnot be limited by the statutory definition of a terrorist act: Lord David Anderson, Lessons for Prevent (Report, July 2025), 95–9.\n14 Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979 (Cth), as enacted, s 4 (ASIO Act).\nDefining Terrorism – Issues Paper – Review of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995\n\n[page 12]\n10\n(d) acts that are offences punishable under the Crimes (Hijacking of Aircraft) Ac\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Independent National Security Legislation Monitor Act 2010\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 2\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Independent+National+Security+Legislation+Monitor+Act+2010\n\n**Sources**:\n- `pages/about.html`\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- Monitor can initiate certain reviews of their own initiative, have a matter referred by the Prime Minister, the Attorney-General or the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) and is also required to undertake certain reviews by the\nIndependent National Security Legislation Monitor Act 2010\n.\nReviews by the Monitor consider the operation, effectiveness and implications of the relevant law, whether it contains appropriate protections for individual rights, remains necessary and proportionate and whether it is consistent with Australia’s internati\n Source: `pages/about.html`\n- ive Monitors have reviewed a broad range of\nnational security and counterterrorism laws.\nThis review is about the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in section 100.1 the Cminal Code Act 1995 (Cth)\n(Criminal Code). It is an own-motion inquiry, conducted under the Independent National Security\nLegislation Monitor Act 2010 (Cth) (INSLM Act).\nWhy review the definition of terrorism?\nIt has been almost a quarter of a century since the terrible attacks of 11 September 2001. Like\nmost other countries, Australia responded promptly to the new threat exemplified by those attacks\ninclud\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 2\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Maritime+Transport+and+Offshore+Facilities+Security+Act+2003\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (Cth) s 5 (definition of ‘financing of terrorism’). Note this scheme also\nincludes an offence against ss 20 or 21 of the Charter of the United Nations Act 1945 (Cth) related to asset freezing.\n176 Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003 (Cth) pt 9 (see especially s 170).\n177 Brendan Walker-Munro, ‘What’s in a Name? Mapping the Changing Definition of “Act of Terrorism” and “Terrorist Act” in Australian Law’,\nIndependent National Security Legislation Monitor (Commissioned Report, April 2025) 1\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- irectorate, The Protection of Critical Infrastructure Against\nTerrorist Attacks: Compendium of Good Practices (2018) 31.\n284 Security of Critical Infrastructure Act 2018 (Cth) s 5; Telecommunications Act 1997 (Cth); Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 (Cth); Maritime\nTransport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003 (Cth). See also Australia-New Zealand Counter-Terrorism Committee, National Guidelines\nfor Protecting Critical Infrastructure from Terrorism (Guidance Document, 2015).\nDefining Terrorism – Issues Paper – Review of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in sectio\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 2\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=National+Security+Information+%28Criminal+and+Civil+Proceedings%29+Act+2004\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- 2B; Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003\n(Vic) pt 5.\n155 See Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, Report 11 of 2020 (24 September 2020) 20–6.\n156 Grant Donaldson, Review into the Operation and Effectiveness of the National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004\n(Report, Independent National Security Legislation Monitor, 30 October 2023) 4.\n157 Lodhi v R [2007] NSWCCA 360 [79] (Speiglman CJ). Also see for example R v Touma [2008] NSWSC 1475 [80], [83]; R v Mulahalilovic [2009]\nNSWSC 1010 [48],[51]; R v Elomar & Ors [\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- 71 See Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017 (NSW).\n172 Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Alert Digest 7 of 2016 (12 October 2016) 54.\n173 Grant Donaldson, Review into the operation and effectiveness of the National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004\n(Report, Independent National Security Legislation Monitor, 30 October 2023).\nDefining Terrorism – Issues Paper – Review of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995\n\n[page 34]\n32\nOther powers and obligations linked to\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Surveillance Legislation Amendment (Identify and Disrupt) Act 2021\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 2\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Surveillance+Legislation+Amendment+%28Identify+and+Disrupt%29+Act+2021\n\n**Sources**:\n- `pages/homepage.html`\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- butions, which are now being considered.\nView the paper\n|\nView submissions\nSLAID response tabled\nThe Government response to the Monitor’s review of the operation, effectiveness and implications of the amendments made by the\nSurveillance Legislation Amendment (Identify and Disrupt) Act 2021 (Cth) (SLAID Act)\nwas tabled in Parliament by the Department of Home Affairs on 10 February 2026.\nFind out more about the review\n|\nRead the government response\nAbout us\nInformation about the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor\nCurrent Reviews\nIs\n Source: `pages/homepage.html`\n- ct or commission of\nterrorism offence under the Criminal Code s 80.2C(1).\n129 Australia-New Zealand Counter-Terrorism Committee, National Counter-Terrorism Plan (Policy Document, 5th edition, 2024), 8.\n130 Introduced by the Surveillance Legislation Amendment (Identify and Disrupt) Act 2021 (Cth). See also a forthcoming INSLM review report of\nthese powers: Identify, Takeover and Disrupt – Special Powers of the AFP and ACIC (expected to be tabled in parliament in late August or\nearly September 2025).\n131 Crimes Act 1913 (Cth) pt IC, div 2, subdiv\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Terrorism Legislation Amendment (High Risk Terrorist Offenders) Act 2021\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 2\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Terrorism+Legislation+Amendment+%28High+Risk+Terrorist+Offenders%29+Act+2021\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- eenacted and\nrenumbered in 2003 by the Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2003 (Cth), sch 1, item 1.\n23 Insertion of a heading ‘Elements of the definition of terrorist act’, inserted to improve readability, by the Counter-Terrorism Legislation\nAmendment (High Risk Terrorist Offenders) Act 2021 (Cth).\n24 Of these 82 people, 3 have been convicted twice for separate incidents: see R v Shoma [2019] VSC 367 and R v Shoma (No 2) [2021] VSC\n797; R v Mohamed, Chaarani & Moukhaiber [2019] VSC 498 and R v Abbas, Chaarani and Mohamed [2019] VSC 775.\n25 Sectio\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- of the criminal justice system’.172 A former\nMonitor recommended CDOs be abolished and extensive amendments be made in relation to\nESOs.173\n167 Criminal Code Amendment (High Risk Terrorist Offenders) Act 2016 (Cth) and Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (High Risk Terrorist\nOffenders) Act 2021 (Cth).\n168 Criminal Code s 105A.7.\n169 Criminal Code ss 105A.7A and 105A.7B.\n170 See Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 (Cth), ss 46, 46A, 60, 65A, 67, and 299; Surveillance Devices Act 2004 (Cth), ss\n14, 16, 27A, 27C, 38, 39 and 65B; Crime\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### AFP Australian Federal Police ASIO Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=AFP+Australian+Federal+Police+ASIO+Australian+Security+Intelligence+Organisation+Australian+Security+Intelligence+Organisation+Act+1979\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- l Threat Assessment\nAssessment’ (Speech, ASIO, 19 February 2025)\nAustralian Government, A Safer Australia – Australia’s\n2025 Counter-Terrorism and Violent Extremism Strategy Counter-Terrorism and Violent Extremism Strategy 2025\n(Policy Document, January 2025)\nAFP Australian Federal Police\nASIO Australian Security Intelligence Organisation\nAustralian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979\nASIO Act\n(Cth)\nCOAG Council of Australian Governments\nCrimes Act Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)\nCriminal Code Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth)\nUnited Nations Security Council Counter-Terrorism\nCommittee Executive Directorate, CTED Analytical Brief:\nCTED Analytical Brief\nA\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Act 2020\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Australian+Security+Intelligence+Organisation+Amendment+Act+2020\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- on Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2003 (Cth). However, since 2021 compulsory questioning powers have been available\nfor espionage, politically motivated violence and acts of foreign interference for adults and politically motivated violence for minors: Australian\nSecurity Intelligence Organisation Amendment Act 2020 (Cth). The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Bill (No.2) 2025, currently\nbefore the Parliament, proposes to further extend adult compulsory questioning powers to include sabotage, the promotion of communal\nviolence, attacks on Australia’s defence\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2003\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Australian+Security+Intelligence+Organisation+Legislation+Amendment+%28Terrorism%29+Act+2003\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- ouse of Representatives, 22 May 1986, 3707 (Lionel Bowen,\nAttorney-General).\n16 ASIO’s questioning and detention powers as enacted in 2003 were linked to the definition of a ‘terrorist act’: Australian Security Intelligence\nOrganisation Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2003 (Cth). However, since 2021 compulsory questioning powers have been available\nfor espionage, politically motivated violence and acts of foreign interference for adults and politically motivated violence for minors: Australian\nSecurity Intelligence Organisation\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Australian Security Intelligence Organization Amendment Act 1986\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Australian+Security+Intelligence+Organization+Amendment+Act+1986\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- serious property damage. The\n15 The change was recommended by the Royal Commission on Australia’s Security Intelligence Agencies: Report on the Australian Security\nIntelligence Organisation (Report, December 1984) 70 [4.88], 72 [4.91(f)], 102–4 [5.54]–[5.56]; Australian Security Intelligence Organization\nAmendment Act 1986 (Cth) s 3; Commonwealth, Parliamentary Debates, House of Representatives, 22 May 1986, 3707 (Lionel Bowen,\nAttorney-General).\n16 ASIO’s questioning and detention powers as enacted in 2003 were linked to the definition of a ‘terrorist act’: Australian Security\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Aviation Transport Security Act 2004\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Aviation+Transport+Security+Act+2004\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- d UN Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate, The Protection of Critical Infrastructure Against\nTerrorist Attacks: Compendium of Good Practices (2018) 31.\n284 Security of Critical Infrastructure Act 2018 (Cth) s 5; Telecommunications Act 1997 (Cth); Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 (Cth); Maritime\nTransport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003 (Cth). See also Australia-New Zealand Counter-Terrorism Committee, National Guidelines\nfor Protecting Critical Infrastructure from Terrorism (Guidance Document, 2015).\nDefining Terrorism – Is\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Border Security Legislation Amendment Act 2002\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Border+Security+Legislation+Amendment+Act+2002\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- ted with the definition.\n1 See Terrorism Act 2000 (UK), s 1.\n2 See Security Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2002 (Cth); Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism Act 2002 (Cth); Criminal\nCode Amendment (Suppression of Terrorist Bombings) Act 2002 (Cth); Border Security Legislation Amendment Act 2002 (Cth); and\nTelecommunications Interception Legislation Amendment Act 2002 (Cth). This counts as separate offences those that have the same\nphysical elements, but different mental elements (e.g. it is one offence to possess a thing knowing it is connected with\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons) Act 1976\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Crimes+%28Internationally+Protected+Persons%29+Act+1976\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- r other activities for the purposes of violent subversion\nin a foreign country or for the purposes of the commission in a foreign country of other\nacts of violence of a kind referred to in paragraph (a);\n(c) acts that are offences punishable under the Crimes (Internationally Protected Persons)\nAct 1976; or\n11 See, eg, Criminal Code ss 82.9 (preparing for or planning sabotage offence); 91.12 (offence of preparing for an espionage offence); 92.4\n(offence of preparing for a foreign interference offence); div 92, subdiv C (foreign interference involving foreign\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Crimes Legislation Amendment (Coercive Control) Act 2022\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Crimes+Legislation+Amendment+%28Coercive+Control%29+Act+2022\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- (A) (serious bodily harm); and New Zealand (a) (serious\nbodily injury).\n287 Criminal Code, dictionary definition of ‘harm’ means physical harm or harm to a person’s mental health, whether temporary or permanent.\nSee, for example, Crimes Legislation Amendment (Coercive Control) Act 2022 (NSW) and Criminal Law (Coercive Control and Affirmative\nConsent) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2023 (Qld).\n288 Commonwealth, Parliamentary Debates, Senate, 24 June 2002, 2479 (Chris Ellison, Minister for Justice).\n289 PJCIS Review 60–2.\n290 Sheller Re\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Foreign Passports (Law Enforcement and Security) Act 2005\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Foreign+Passports+%28Law+Enforcement+and+Security%29+Act+2005\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- ion Act 1975 (Cth) s 18C; Criminal Code, div 80 sub-div CA, div 474 sub-div HA , ss 80.2A–80.2BE, 80.2D,\n474.15–474.16.\n194 See Criminal Code div 119; Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 134B and 202; Australian Passports Act 2005 (Cth) ss 14, 22A; Foreign Passports\n(Law Enforcement and Security) Act 2005 (Cth) ss 15A, 16A; Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Foreign Fighters) Act 2014 (Cth)\nsch 2.\nDefining Terrorism – Issues Paper – Review of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995\n\n[page 36]\n34\nChapter 4: Is th\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Independent National Security Legislation Monitor Act INSLM Act 2010\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Independent+National+Security+Legislation+Monitor+Act+INSLM+Act+2010\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- Hostages Convention opened for signature on 18 December 1979, 1316 UNTS\n205 (entered into force 3 June 1983)\nInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,\nICCPR opened for signature on 16 December 1966, 999 UNTS\n171 (entered into force 23 March 1976)\nIndependent National Security Legislation Monitor Act\nINSLM Act\n2010 (Cth)\nISIL Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant\nSenate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee,\nParliament of Australia, Consideration of Legislation\nReferred to the Committee: Security Legislation\nAmendment (Terrorism) Bill 2002) (No 2); Suppression\nL\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### National Health Security Act 2007\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=National+Health+Security+Act+2007\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- rs Act 2013 (Cth) ss 8, 22.\n183 AusCheck Act 2007 (Cth).\n184 Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 (Cth) s 24AC.\n185 Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 (Cth) s 9A.\n186 Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956 (Cth), s 4A.\n187 National Health Security Act 2007 (Cth) s 89.\n188 Juries Regulation 2018 (ACT), sch 1 pt 1.2; Jury Act 1977 (NSW) sch 1 s 1(1)(b). Persons may also be excluded because of conviction of a\nterrorism offence carrying a significant penalty, eg Jury Act 1995 (Qld) s 4(3)(m); Jury Act 1927 (SA) s 1\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### National Radioactive Waste Management Act 2012\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=National+Radioactive+Waste+Management+Act+2012\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- tion to the Lindt Café siege in Sydney in December 2014, see Declaration of Terrorist Incident [F2015L00053] (15 January 2015).\n179 Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) s 31B.\n180 National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Act 2018 (Cth) s 63.\n181 National Radioactive Waste Management Act 2012 (Cth) s 4A.\n182 Customs Act 1901 (Cth), s 203DA and Maritime Powers Act 2013 (Cth) ss 8, 22.\n183 AusCheck Act 2007 (Cth).\n184 Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 (Cth) s 24AC.\n185 Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 (Cth) s 9A.\n1\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Act 2018\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=National+Redress+Scheme+for+Institutional+Child+Sexual+Abuse+Act+2018\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- There has only been one declaration of a terrorist incident made in Australia in\nrelation to the Lindt Café siege in Sydney in December 2014, see Declaration of Terrorist Incident [F2015L00053] (15 January 2015).\n179 Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) s 31B.\n180 National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Act 2018 (Cth) s 63.\n181 National Radioactive Waste Management Act 2012 (Cth) s 4A.\n182 Customs Act 1901 (Cth), s 203DA and Maritime Powers Act 2013 (Cth) ss 8, 22.\n183 AusCheck Act 2007 (Cth).\n184 Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 (Cth) s 24AC.\n185 Classification\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Security of Critical Infrastructure Act 2018\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Security+of+Critical+Infrastructure+Act+2018\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- , UN Doc S/RES/2341 (13 February 2017), 9th preamble.\n283 UN Office of Counter-Terrorism and UN Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate, The Protection of Critical Infrastructure Against\nTerrorist Attacks: Compendium of Good Practices (2018) 31.\n284 Security of Critical Infrastructure Act 2018 (Cth) s 5; Telecommunications Act 1997 (Cth); Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 (Cth); Maritime\nTransport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003 (Cth). See also Australia-New Zealand Counter-Terrorism Committee, National Guidelines\nfor Protecting Critic\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### See National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=See+National+Security+Information+%28Criminal+and+Civil+Proceedings%29+Act+2004\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- sufficiently express the court’s and the\ncommunity’s repugnance at the actions and intentions of the respondent, and to deter other\nlike-minded … young people from embarking on, and proceeding down, the same pathway…158\n154 See National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004 (Cth); Criminal Code s 93.2; Foreign Evidence Act 1994 (Cth) pt\n3A as well as state and territory rules such as: Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) ch 6 pt 2B; Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003\n(Vic) pt 5.\n155 See Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### See Security Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2002\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=See+Security+Legislation+Amendment+%28Terrorism%29+Act+2002\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- essing the\nnecessity and proportionality of the definition. However, this review is not a review into any of the\nspecific powers, obligations or offences associated with the definition.\n1 See Terrorism Act 2000 (UK), s 1.\n2 See Security Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2002 (Cth); Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism Act 2002 (Cth); Criminal\nCode Amendment (Suppression of Terrorist Bombings) Act 2002 (Cth); Border Security Legislation Amendment Act 2002 (Cth); and\nTelecommunications Interception Legislation Amendment Act 20\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Social Security Act 1991\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Social+Security+Act+1991\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- d Cyclone Insurance Act 2003 (Cth) ss 6–8. There has only been one declaration of a terrorist incident made in Australia in\nrelation to the Lindt Café siege in Sydney in December 2014, see Declaration of Terrorist Incident [F2015L00053] (15 January 2015).\n179 Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) s 31B.\n180 National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Act 2018 (Cth) s 63.\n181 National Radioactive Waste Management Act 2012 (Cth) s 4A.\n182 Customs Act 1901 (Cth), s 203DA and Maritime Powers Act 2013 (Cth) ss 8, 22.\n183 AusCheck Act\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Telecommunications Interception Legislation Amendment Act 2002\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: medium\n**Mentions**: 1\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Telecommunications+Interception+Legislation+Amendment+Act+2002\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- 1.\n2 See Security Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2002 (Cth); Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism Act 2002 (Cth); Criminal\nCode Amendment (Suppression of Terrorist Bombings) Act 2002 (Cth); Border Security Legislation Amendment Act 2002 (Cth); and\nTelecommunications Interception Legislation Amendment Act 2002 (Cth). This counts as separate offences those that have the same\nphysical elements, but different mental elements (e.g. it is one offence to possess a thing knowing it is connected with a terrorist act, and it is\nanother offence to possess a thing reckless as\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Charter of the United Nations Act 1945\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: low\n**Mentions**: 2\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Charter+of+the+United+Nations+Act+1945\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- itor (Commissioned Report, April 2025), available on the\nINSLM website.\n175 Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (Cth) s 5 (definition of ‘financing of terrorism’). Note this scheme also\nincludes an offence against ss 20 or 21 of the Charter of the United Nations Act 1945 (Cth) related to asset freezing.\n176 Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003 (Cth) pt 9 (see especially s 170).\n177 Brendan Walker-Munro, ‘What’s in a Name? Mapping the Changing Definition of “Act of Terrorism” and “Terrorist Act” in Aust\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n- el welfare\npayments.194\n3.50 Finally, at the state and territory level there are general criminal law offences including murder, assault,\narson, damage to property, hate crimes and specific crimes directed at organised criminal behaviour.\n189 Under s 6 of the Charter of the United Nations Act 1945 (Cth), the minister has the power to make regulations to give effect to UN Security\nCouncil decisions. Under s 20 of the Charter of the United Nations (Dealing with Assets) Regulations 2008 (Cth), the minister must list a\nperson or entity ‘if the Minister is\n Source: `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n### Criminal Code Amendment (Hate Crimes) Act 2025\n\n**Type**: Act\n**Confidence**: low\n**Mentions**: 2\n**Register search**: https://www.legislation.gov.au/search?query=Criminal+Code+Amendment+%28Hate+Crimes%29+Act+2025\n\n**Sources**:\n- `other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pages.jsonl`\n\n**Evidence contexts**:\n- act in the UK to encompass such violence: see Jonathan Hall, Independent Review on Classification of Extreme\nViolence Used in Southport Attack on 29 July 2024 (Report, Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, 13 March 2025).\n101 Criminal Code Amendment (Hate Crimes) Act 2025.\n102 Commonwealth of Australia, Parliamentary Debates, House of Representatives, 12 September 2024, 6649 (Mark Dreyfus, Attorney-General).\n103 According to the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, there was a 316% increase\n\n_…truncated, open the .md file for the full content._", "global_initiatives_md": null, "strategy": { "reporting_period": "2024-25", "corporate_plan_period": "2025-26", "vision": null, "vision_source_page": null, "purposes": null, "purposes_source_page": null, "how_we_deliver": null, "how_we_deliver_source_page": null, "government_priorities": [], "outcomes": [], "values": [], "values_framework_name": null, "kpi_targets_2025_26": [], "kpi_results_2024_25": [], "_source_urls": { "annual_report_url": "https://web.archive.org.au/awa/20240317003732mp_/https://www.inslm.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-12/INSLM-annual-report-2022-23.pdf", "corporate_plan_url": "" } }, "ideas": [ { "entity_id": "B-003035", "entity_name": "Independent National Security Legislation Monitor", "folder_name": "Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor", "category": "Risk & Assurance", "scale": "small", "title": "Recommendation tracker for audits, reviews, and inquiries", "idea": "Publish a single internal tracker for audit/review recommendations, owners, due dates, and implementation evidence.", "quote": "Issues Paper – Review of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995\nIssues paper\nPublication date\n11 August 2025\nHearing\nDefining terrorism: Review of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995\nDownload\nIssues Paper – Review of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 [PDF]\nThe definition of a ‘terrorist act’ under section 100.1 of the\nCriminal Code Act 1995\n(Cth) (\nCriminal Code\n) is an element of a number of serious offences and enlivens a broad range of policing and other powers under Commonwealth, state and territory laws.", "impact": "High", "effort": "Low", "proof": "Evidence-backed", "beneficiaries": "Executives / assurance teams", "source": "pages/publications-index.html (https://www.inslm.gov.au/publications/issues-paper-review-definition-terrorist-act-section-1001-criminal-code-act-1995)", "implementation": [ "Pick one high-volume process or document family.", "Name an owner and baseline current volume, time, cost, and satisfaction.", "Run a 4-8 week pilot with clear before/after metrics.", "Publish lessons and decide whether to scale." ], "risks": [ "Privacy and data quality", "Change fatigue", "Unclear accountability", "Regulatory capture", "Over-automation of judgement" ] }, { "entity_id": "B-003035", "entity_name": "Independent National Security Legislation Monitor", "folder_name": "Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor", "category": "Risk & Assurance", "scale": "large", "title": "Integrated assurance and lessons-learned system", "idea": "Create an assurance system that connects audit findings, risk registers, delivery reviews, and investment decisions.", "quote": "Issues Paper – Review of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995\nIssues paper\nPublication date\n11 August 2025\nHearing\nDefining terrorism: Review of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995\nDownload\nIssues Paper – Review of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 [PDF]\nThe definition of a ‘terrorist act’ under section 100.1 of the\nCriminal Code Act 1995\n(Cth) (\nCriminal Code\n) is an element of a number of serious offences and enlivens a broad range of policing and other powers under Commonwealth, state and territory laws.", "impact": "Very High", "effort": "High", "proof": "Evidence-backed", "beneficiaries": "Executives / assurance teams", "source": "pages/publications-index.html (https://www.inslm.gov.au/publications/issues-paper-review-definition-terrorist-act-section-1001-criminal-code-act-1995)", "implementation": [ "Create a senior responsible owner and cross-functional delivery team.", "Map legislation, data, privacy, procurement, cyber, and workforce constraints.", "Co-design with users and frontline staff before technology selection.", "Stage delivery through pilots, benefits tracking, and public reporting." ], "risks": [ "Privacy and data quality", "Change fatigue", "Unclear accountability", "Regulatory capture", "Over-automation of judgement" ] }, { "entity_id": "B-003035", "entity_name": "Independent National Security Legislation Monitor", "folder_name": "Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor", "category": "Data & Performance", "scale": "small", "title": "KPI evidence register with named owners", "idea": "Create a simple register mapping each KPI to source data, owner, frequency, target, and last result.", "quote": "Some\nof the reviews also cited the 2003 bombing of the UN Headquarters in Baghdad as a reason for the\ninclusion of ‘international organisations’, or the UN as a target under the definition.208 In 2014 the\nCouncil of Australian Governments (COAG) supported a recommendation to include reference to UN\nentities in the definition to afford them the same protection as Australian and foreign governments,\nnoting:\nSuch recognition is appropriate, given the international governmental functions performed by these\nagencies, and evidence that UN agencies have been the target of terrorist acts abroad.209\n199 UK see Terrorism Act 2000 (UK) s 1; USA see Title 18 US Code §2331; Canada see Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c.", "impact": "High", "effort": "Low", "proof": "Evidence-backed", "beneficiaries": "Executives / Parliament / public", "source": "other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)", "implementation": [ "Pick one high-volume process or document family.", "Name an owner and baseline current volume, time, cost, and satisfaction.", "Run a 4-8 week pilot with clear before/after metrics.", "Publish lessons and decide whether to scale." ], "risks": [ "Privacy and data quality", "Change fatigue", "Unclear accountability" ] }, { "entity_id": "B-003035", "entity_name": "Independent National Security Legislation Monitor", "folder_name": "Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor", "category": "Data & Performance", "scale": "large", "title": "Outcome dashboard linking budget, delivery, and public impact", "idea": "Build a public-facing outcome dashboard showing spend, outputs, outcomes, and delivery confidence.", "quote": "Some\nof the reviews also cited the 2003 bombing of the UN Headquarters in Baghdad as a reason for the\ninclusion of ‘international organisations’, or the UN as a target under the definition.208 In 2014 the\nCouncil of Australian Governments (COAG) supported a recommendation to include reference to UN\nentities in the definition to afford them the same protection as Australian and foreign governments,\nnoting:\nSuch recognition is appropriate, given the international governmental functions performed by these\nagencies, and evidence that UN agencies have been the target of terrorist acts abroad.209\n199 UK see Terrorism Act 2000 (UK) s 1; USA see Title 18 US Code §2331; Canada see Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c.", "impact": "Very High", "effort": "High", "proof": "Evidence-backed", "beneficiaries": "Executives / Parliament / public", "source": "other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)", "implementation": [ "Create a senior responsible owner and cross-functional delivery team.", "Map legislation, data, privacy, procurement, cyber, and workforce constraints.", "Co-design with users and frontline staff before technology selection.", "Stage delivery through pilots, benefits tracking, and public reporting." ], "risks": [ "Privacy and data quality", "Change fatigue", "Unclear accountability" ] }, { "entity_id": "B-003035", "entity_name": "Independent National Security Legislation Monitor", "folder_name": "Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor", "category": "Citizen Services", "scale": "small", "title": "Plain-language service pages and proactive status updates", "idea": "Rewrite high-volume pages and letters into plain language, add status notifications, and measure contact reduction.", "quote": "The agencies said they were ‘increasingly concerned’ about this issue, noting\nthat radicalised minors can pose the ‘same credible terrorist threat as adults’ and the involvement of\nminors in violent extremist activities can have ‘lifelong consequences’.90 The paper noted that violent\nextremist content is ‘more accessible’, with violent extremists ‘adopt[ing] the internet as a vector for\ntheir activities’ through ‘seemingly innocuous social media and gaming platforms’.91\n2.22 In his 2025 Annual Threat Assessment the Director-General noted that in the next 5 years, ‘a\ngeneration of digital natives…[will] enter a vulnerable age for radicalisation.’92 He elaborated:\nFor some, their sense of normality, identity and community will be more influenced by the online\nworld than the real world.", "impact": "High", "effort": "Low", "proof": "Evidence-backed", "beneficiaries": "Citizens / service users", "source": "other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)", "implementation": [ "Pick one high-volume process or document family.", "Name an owner and baseline current volume, time, cost, and satisfaction.", "Run a 4-8 week pilot with clear before/after metrics.", "Publish lessons and decide whether to scale." ], "risks": [ "Privacy and data quality", "Change fatigue", "Unclear accountability", "Digital exclusion", "Low public trust if feedback is not acted on" ] }, { "entity_id": "B-003035", "entity_name": "Independent National Security Legislation Monitor", "folder_name": "Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor", "category": "Citizen Services", "scale": "large", "title": "Single front door for life-event based services", "idea": "Bundle services around life events so citizens can complete related steps across agencies in one journey.", "quote": "The agencies said they were ‘increasingly concerned’ about this issue, noting\nthat radicalised minors can pose the ‘same credible terrorist threat as adults’ and the involvement of\nminors in violent extremist activities can have ‘lifelong consequences’.90 The paper noted that violent\nextremist content is ‘more accessible’, with violent extremists ‘adopt[ing] the internet as a vector for\ntheir activities’ through ‘seemingly innocuous social media and gaming platforms’.91\n2.22 In his 2025 Annual Threat Assessment the Director-General noted that in the next 5 years, ‘a\ngeneration of digital natives…[will] enter a vulnerable age for radicalisation.’92 He elaborated:\nFor some, their sense of normality, identity and community will be more influenced by the online\nworld than the real world.", "impact": "Very High", "effort": "High", "proof": "Evidence-backed", "beneficiaries": "Citizens / service users", "source": "other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)", "implementation": [ "Create a senior responsible owner and cross-functional delivery team.", "Map legislation, data, privacy, procurement, cyber, and workforce constraints.", "Co-design with users and frontline staff before technology selection.", "Stage delivery through pilots, benefits tracking, and public reporting." ], "risks": [ "Privacy and data quality", "Change fatigue", "Unclear accountability", "Digital exclusion", "Low public trust if feedback is not acted on" ] }, { "entity_id": "B-003035", "entity_name": "Independent National Security Legislation Monitor", "folder_name": "Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor", "category": "Regulation & Policy", "scale": "small", "title": "Regulatory burden scan for forms, guidance, and reporting", "idea": "Identify the top 10 highest-friction reporting obligations and simplify guidance, forms, or evidence requirements.", "quote": "[pages 1,2,3]\n[Page 1]\nIndependent National Security\nLegislation Monitor\nDefining\nTerrorism\nIssues Paper\nReview of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in\nsection 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995", "impact": "High", "effort": "Low", "proof": "Evidence-backed", "beneficiaries": "Regulated entities / policy teams", "source": "other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)", "implementation": [ "Pick one high-volume process or document family.", "Name an owner and baseline current volume, time, cost, and satisfaction.", "Run a 4-8 week pilot with clear before/after metrics.", "Publish lessons and decide whether to scale." ], "risks": [ "Privacy and data quality", "Change fatigue", "Unclear accountability", "Regulatory capture", "Over-automation of judgement" ] }, { "entity_id": "B-003035", "entity_name": "Independent National Security Legislation Monitor", "folder_name": "Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor", "category": "Regulation & Policy", "scale": "large", "title": "Adaptive regulation program with live feedback loops", "idea": "Create an adaptive regulation model using sandboxes, industry data, risk scoring, and regular rule updates.", "quote": "[pages 1,2,3]\n[Page 1]\nIndependent National Security\nLegislation Monitor\nDefining\nTerrorism\nIssues Paper\nReview of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in\nsection 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995", "impact": "Very High", "effort": "High", "proof": "Evidence-backed", "beneficiaries": "Regulated entities / policy teams", "source": "other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)", "implementation": [ "Create a senior responsible owner and cross-functional delivery team.", "Map legislation, data, privacy, procurement, cyber, and workforce constraints.", "Co-design with users and frontline staff before technology selection.", "Stage delivery through pilots, benefits tracking, and public reporting." ], "risks": [ "Privacy and data quality", "Change fatigue", "Unclear accountability", "Regulatory capture", "Over-automation of judgement" ] }, { "entity_id": "B-003035", "entity_name": "Independent National Security Legislation Monitor", "folder_name": "Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor", "category": "Citizen Participation", "scale": "small", "title": "Consultation feedback summaries with response tracking", "idea": "Summarise consultation submissions by theme and publish what changed in response.", "quote": "The agencies said they were ‘increasingly concerned’ about this issue, noting\nthat radicalised minors can pose the ‘same credible terrorist threat as adults’ and the involvement of\nminors in violent extremist activities can have ‘lifelong consequences’.90 The paper noted that violent\nextremist content is ‘more accessible’, with violent extremists ‘adopt[ing] the internet as a vector for\ntheir activities’ through ‘seemingly innocuous social media and gaming platforms’.91\n2.22 In his 2025 Annual Threat Assessment the Director-General noted that in the next 5 years, ‘a\ngeneration of digital natives…[will] enter a vulnerable age for radicalisation.’92 He elaborated:\nFor some, their sense of normality, identity and community will be more influenced by the online\nworld than the real world.", "impact": "High", "effort": "Low", "proof": "Evidence-backed", "beneficiaries": "Citizens / stakeholders / policy teams", "source": "other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)", "implementation": [ "Pick one high-volume process or document family.", "Name an owner and baseline current volume, time, cost, and satisfaction.", "Run a 4-8 week pilot with clear before/after metrics.", "Publish lessons and decide whether to scale." ], "risks": [ "Privacy and data quality", "Change fatigue", "Unclear accountability", "Digital exclusion", "Low public trust if feedback is not acted on" ] }, { "entity_id": "B-003035", "entity_name": "Independent National Security Legislation Monitor", "folder_name": "Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor", "category": "Citizen Participation", "scale": "large", "title": "Always-on policy participation platform", "idea": "Create a standing participation platform where citizens and stakeholders can propose, vote, and track ideas.", "quote": "The agencies said they were ‘increasingly concerned’ about this issue, noting\nthat radicalised minors can pose the ‘same credible terrorist threat as adults’ and the involvement of\nminors in violent extremist activities can have ‘lifelong consequences’.90 The paper noted that violent\nextremist content is ‘more accessible’, with violent extremists ‘adopt[ing] the internet as a vector for\ntheir activities’ through ‘seemingly innocuous social media and gaming platforms’.91\n2.22 In his 2025 Annual Threat Assessment the Director-General noted that in the next 5 years, ‘a\ngeneration of digital natives…[will] enter a vulnerable age for radicalisation.’92 He elaborated:\nFor some, their sense of normality, identity and community will be more influenced by the online\nworld than the real world.", "impact": "Very High", "effort": "High", "proof": "Evidence-backed", "beneficiaries": "Citizens / stakeholders / policy teams", "source": "other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)", "implementation": [ "Create a senior responsible owner and cross-functional delivery team.", "Map legislation, data, privacy, procurement, cyber, and workforce constraints.", "Co-design with users and frontline staff before technology selection.", "Stage delivery through pilots, benefits tracking, and public reporting." ], "risks": [ "Privacy and data quality", "Change fatigue", "Unclear accountability", "Digital exclusion", "Low public trust if feedback is not acted on" ] }, { "entity_id": "B-003035", "entity_name": "Independent National Security Legislation Monitor", "folder_name": "Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor", "category": "Procurement & Delivery", "scale": "small", "title": "Procurement lessons library for repeat purchases", "idea": "Capture reusable procurement clauses, market lessons, supplier performance notes, and common evaluation criteria.", "quote": "Resolution 2341 does not define what ‘critical infrastructure’ is, stating\nthat ‘each State determines what constitutes its critical infrastructure’.282 The UN Office of Counter-\nTerrorism and the UN Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate have issued a compendium\nof good practice in relation to the protection of critical infrastructure against terrorist attacks and while\nthey note countries are left with significant discretion in choosing the criteria for identifying which\ninfrastructure satisfies the ‘criticality’ threshold, they have provided some guidance of best practice:\n[critical infrastructure] can be defined, among others, by taking into account the role they play in the\npromotion and protection of human rights (for example, infrastructure that is vital for the functioning\nof healthcare delivery systems; emergency service systems, water and wastewater systems, etc.)", "impact": "High", "effort": "Low", "proof": "Evidence-backed", "beneficiaries": "Delivery teams / suppliers", "source": "other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)", "implementation": [ "Pick one high-volume process or document family.", "Name an owner and baseline current volume, time, cost, and satisfaction.", "Run a 4-8 week pilot with clear before/after metrics.", "Publish lessons and decide whether to scale." ], "risks": [ "Privacy and data quality", "Change fatigue", "Unclear accountability" ] }, { "entity_id": "B-003035", "entity_name": "Independent National Security Legislation Monitor", "folder_name": "Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor", "category": "Procurement & Delivery", "scale": "large", "title": "Portfolio delivery office for major investments", "idea": "Stand up a portfolio delivery office that tracks benefits, risks, dependencies, procurement, and delivery confidence.", "quote": "Resolution 2341 does not define what ‘critical infrastructure’ is, stating\nthat ‘each State determines what constitutes its critical infrastructure’.282 The UN Office of Counter-\nTerrorism and the UN Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate have issued a compendium\nof good practice in relation to the protection of critical infrastructure against terrorist attacks and while\nthey note countries are left with significant discretion in choosing the criteria for identifying which\ninfrastructure satisfies the ‘criticality’ threshold, they have provided some guidance of best practice:\n[critical infrastructure] can be defined, among others, by taking into account the role they play in the\npromotion and protection of human rights (for example, infrastructure that is vital for the functioning\nof healthcare delivery systems; emergency service systems, water and wastewater systems, etc.)", "impact": "Very High", "effort": "High", "proof": "Evidence-backed", "beneficiaries": "Delivery teams / suppliers", "source": "other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf (https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf)", "implementation": [ "Create a senior responsible owner and cross-functional delivery team.", "Map legislation, data, privacy, procurement, cyber, and workforce constraints.", "Co-design with users and frontline staff before technology selection.", "Stage delivery through pilots, benefits tracking, and public reporting." ], "risks": [ "Privacy and data quality", "Change fatigue", "Unclear accountability" ] } ], "legislation_administered": [], "artifacts": [ { "category": "other-pdfs", "year": "2025", "url": "https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf", "file": "other-pdfs/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf", "bytes": 19548209, "link_text": "Issues Paper – Review of the definition of a ‘terrorist act’ in section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 [PDF]" }, { "category": "annual-reports", "year": "2024", "url": "https://web.archive.org.au/awa/20240317003732mp_/https://www.inslm.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-12/INSLM-annual-report-2022-23.pdf", "file": "annual-reports/2024.pdf", "bytes": 1052731, "link_text": "Annual Report" } ], "_meta": { "snapshot_built_at": "2026-05-13T11:02:52+00:00", "strategy_brief_meta": { "model": "nova-micro", "folder": "Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor", "annual_report": { "file": null, "url": "", "year": null }, "corporate_plan": { "file": "other-pdfs\\INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.txt", "url": "https://www.inslm.gov.au/system/files/2025-08/INSLM-terrorism-Issues-Paper.pdf", "year": null }, "usage": { "input_tokens": 12052, "output_tokens": 155, "total_tokens": 12207, "model": "nova-micro" }, "cost_usd": 0.00044352000000000004, "elapsed_seconds": 1.89, "generated_at": "2026-05-13T10:33:31+00:00" }, "ideas_manifest": { "entity_id": "B-003035", "entity_name": "Independent National Security Legislation Monitor", "folder_name": "Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor", "generated_at": "2026-05-09T23:05:24.530148+00:00", "idea_count": 12, "markdown": "ideas/Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor_ideas.md", "jsonl": "ideas/ideas.jsonl", "inputs": [ "Independent-National-Security-Legislation-Monitor_strategy-overview.md", "strategy-evidence.json", "global-intelligence/source-manifest.json" ] }, "global_intel_meta": null } }