File #2821: "2020_Book_CommitteesOfInfluence.pdf"
Testo
1|Foreword|5
1|Preface|9
1|Acknowledgements|11
1|Contents|12
1|List of Acronyms and Abbreviations|16
1|List of Tables|18
1|Part I: Parliamentary Committees and Rights Protection in Australia|19
2|Chapter 1: Introduction|20
3|1.1 Why Study Parliamentary Committees?|20
4|1.1.1 Why Is This Research Unique?|24
4|1.1.2 Why Use Counter-Terrorism Law as a Case Study?|25
4|1.1.3 What ‘Rights’ Are Considered?|27
3|1.2 Parliamentary Committees and Rights Protection in Australia|30
3|1.3 Scepticism About the Parliamentary Model of Rights Protection|30
3|1.4 Overcoming Scepticism About the Parliamentary Model of Rights Protection|34
3|1.5 Structure and Overview of Chapters|39
3|References|40
4|Legal Materials|40
4|Cases|40
4|Legislation|40
4|International Law Materials|41
4|Books/Articles/Reports/Speeches|41
2|Chapter 2: Methodology|47
3|2.1 Assessing Parliamentary Committees|47
3|2.2 The Assessment Framework Adopted in This Book|49
3|2.3 Key Steps in the Assessment Framework|50
4|2.3.1 Legislative Impact|52
4|2.3.2 Public Impact|52
4|2.3.3 Hidden Impact|53
3|References|53
4|Books/Articles/Reports/Speeches|53
2|Chapter 3: The Australian Landscape and the Making of Counter-Terrorism Laws|56
3|3.1 The Parliamentary Committee System and the Australian Parliament|56
4|3.1.1 The Constitutional Understanding of the Role of Parliament|56
4|3.1.2 Parliamentary Committees and Parliamentary Lawmaking|59
3|3.2 The Emergence of the Australian Parliamentary Committee System|61
3|3.3 Committees Examined in Detail in this Book|64
4|3.3.1 Senate Scrutiny of Bills Committee|64
5|3.3.1.1 Membership, Scrutiny Mandate and Outputs|64
5|3.3.1.2 A Technical Scrutiny Committee?|66
4|3.3.2 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security|66
4|3.3.3 Senate Standing Committees on Legal and Constitutional Affairs|68
4|3.3.4 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights|71
5|3.3.4.1 Membership, Mandate and Outputs|71
5|3.3.4.2 A ‘Dialogue-Creating’ Committee?|73
4|3.3.5 Non-Parliamentary Scrutiny Bodies|74
3|3.4 Counter-Terrorism Law Making in Australia|75
4|3.4.1 The First Tranche: The Howard Government’s Response to ‘September 11’ (2001–2003)|77
4|3.4.2 The Second Tranche: Pre-charge Detention and Protection of Security Information (2004–2005)|79
4|3.4.3 The Third Tranche: Control Orders and Preventative Detention Orders (2005)|80
4|3.4.4 Time for Review: Parliamentary and Judicial Review of Counter-Terrorism Laws (2005–2008)|82
4|3.4.5 The Fourth Tranche: Updating Australia’s Counter-Terrorism Framework (2008–2010)|84
4|3.4.6 The Fifth Tranche: Dealing with ‘Home-Grown’ Terrorism (2013–2018)|86
4|3.4.7 The Sixth Tranche: Post-Conviction Controls and Response to Cyber-Terrorism (2016–2019)|88
3|3.5 Institutional Engagement on Rights Issues and the Impact of Parliamentary Committees|90
3|References|91
4|Cases|91
4|Bills|91
4|Legislation|93
4|International Law Materials|93
4|Parliamentary Materials|94
4|Standing Orders|94
4|Parliamentary Debates|94
4|Parliamentary Committee Reports|94
4|Books/Articles/ Reports/Speeches|96
4|Websites|102
1|Part II: Applying the Assessment Framework|103
2|Chapter 4: Participation and Legitimacy|104
3|4.1 Why Look for Key Participants and Evidence of Legitimacy?|104
4|4.1.1 Who Are the Key Participants?|105
4|4.1.2 Rates and Diversity of Participation|105
5|4.1.2.1 Strong Performer: The LCA Committees|105
5|4.1.2.2 A Narrower Range of Participants for the Technical Scrutiny Committees|112
5|4.1.2.3 The PJCIS Experience|112
5|4.1.2.4 The Usual Suspects|114
3|4.2 Evidence of Legitimacy|116
4|4.2.1 The Challenge of Gathering Views on Legitimacy|116
4|4.2.2 A Spectrum of Legitimacy among Committees|117
4|4.2.3 Tensions Between the Deliberative and Authoritative Attributes of Committees|117
5|4.2.3.1 SSCSB|119
5|4.2.3.2 PJCIS|120
5|4.2.3.3 LCA Committees|122
5|4.2.3.4 PJCHR|123
6|(i) The Contested Role and Purpose of the PJCHR|124
6|(ii) Structural and Procedural Risks to PJCHR’s Legitimacy|127
6|(iii) Clarifying the Role and Rights Contribution of the PJCHR|128
3|4.3 Summary of Findings on Legitimacy|129
3|References|130
4|Bills|130
4|Legislation|130
4|Parliamentary Committee Reports|130
4|Books/Articles/Reports/Speeches|131
2|Chapter 5: Legislative Impact|133
3|5.1 Why Look for Legislative Impact?|133
3|5.2 Evidence of Legislative Impact|137
3|5.3 Three ‘Phases’ of Parliamentary Scrutiny of the Case Study Bills|138
4|5.3.1 Phase 1: Fast and Furious Scrutiny|138
5|5.3.1.1 The SLAT Acts (CSA 1)|139
5|5.3.1.2 ASIO Bill 2002 and ASIO Act 2003 (CSA 2 and 3)|140
5|5.3.1.3 Anti-Terrorism Act 2004 (CSA 4)|144
5|5.3.1.4 National Security Information (Criminal Proceedings) Bill 2004 (Cth)|146
5|5.3.1.5 The Control Orders Act (CSA 6)|148
4|5.3.2 Phase 2: Consolidating Reform of Counter-Terrorism Laws|150
5|5.3.2.1 The INSLM Act (CSA 7)|150
5|5.3.2.2 National Security Legislation Amendment Act 2010 (Cth) (CSA 8)|152
4|5.3.3 Phase 3: The Rise of the PJCIS and the Introduction of the PJCHR|155
5|5.3.3.1 The Data Retention Act (CSA 10)|156
5|5.3.3.2 The Foreign Fighters Act 2014 (CSA 11)|160
5|5.3.3.3 Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Act (No 1) 2014 (Cth) (CSA 10)|163
5|5.3.3.4 The Citizenship Act (CSA 12)|165
5|5.3.3.5 The High Risk Offenders Act (CSA 13)|167
5|5.3.3.6 The Encryption Act (CSA 14)|171
5|5.3.3.7 The TEO Bill (CSA 15)|175
5|5.3.3.8 An Epilogue: The Identity Matching Laws|180
3|5.4 Summary of Findings on Legislative Impact|181
3|References|184
4|Bills|184
4|Explanatory Memorandum|186
4|Legislation|187
4|Parliamentary Debates|188
4|Parliamentary Committee Reports|188
4|Books/Articles/Reports/Speeches|192
2|Chapter 6: Public Impact|196
3|6.1 Why Look for Public Impact?|196
3|6.2 Time for Parliamentary Scrutiny and Debate|198
4|6.2.1 Period Between Introduction and Enactment|199
3|6.3 Influence of Parliamentary Committees on the Public Debate on the Case Study Bills|204
4|6.3.1 Parliamentary Debates|204
4|6.3.2 Signs of an Emerging Rights-Scrutiny Culture within the Federal Parliament|206
3|6.4 Media Commentary|210
3|6.5 Influence of Formal Parliamentary Scrutiny on Post-Enactment Review of the Case Study Bills|214
3|6.6 Summary of Findings on Public Impact|217
3|References|218
4|Bills|218
4|Explanatory Memorandum|218
4|Standing Orders|219
4|Parliamentary Committee Reports|219
4|Books/Articles/Reports/Speeches|219
2|Chapter 7: Hidden Impact|222
3|7.1 Why Look for Hidden or Behind-the-Scenes Impact of Parliamentary Committees?|222
3|7.2 Documentary Evidence|224
3|7.3 Interview Material|226
4|7.3.1 The ‘Technical Scrutiny’ Committees|226
4|7.3.2 The ‘Inquiry-Based’ Committees|231
3|7.4 Summary of Findings on Hidden Impact|234
3|References|235
4|Parliamentary Committee Reports|235
4|Books/Articles/Reports/Speeches|236
1|Part III: Improving the Rights-Protecting Capacity of the Parliamentary Committee System|238
2|References|241
3|Books/Articles/Speeches|241
2|Chapter 8: Capitalising on the Rights-Protecting Potential of the System of Parliamentary Committees|242
3|8.1 A Diversity of Attributes Is Key to Improving Rights Impacts|242
3|8.2 Inquiry-Based Committees Can Provide a Meaningful Deliberative Forum|243
3|8.3 Technical Scrutiny Committees Provide Vital Resources for Those Engaged in the Public Inquiry Process|245
3|8.4 Investing in the System of Committees|247
4|8.4.1 Improving Communication Between Committees and Key Participants|248
4|8.4.2 Increasing Committee Resources and Adopting Strategies to Address High Workloads and Ensure Timely Tabling of Reports|250
4|8.4.3 Encouraging Multi-committee Scrutiny of Rights-Engaging Bills|252
4|8.4.4 Documenting and Acknowledging the Contribution Parliamentary Committees Make to a Common Rights-Scrutiny Culture Within the Australian Parliament|255
3|References|261
4|Standing Orders|261
4|Parliamentary Committee Reports|261
4|Books/Articles/Reports/Speeches|261
4|Websites|264
2|Chapter 9: Refining the Roles and Promoting the Strengths of Individual Committees within the System|265
3|9.1 Implications for Individual Committees Within the System|265
3|9.2 LCA Committees and Other Senate Legislation Committees|266
3|9.3 PJCIS and Other Statutory Based, Subject-Specialist Committees|270
3|9.4 SSCSB and the SSCRO|274
3|9.5 PJCHR|278
3|9.6 Summary of Committee-Specific Reforms|286
3|References|287
4|Standing Orders|287
4|Parliamentary Committee Reports|287
4|Books/Articles/Reports/Speeches|287
2|Chapter 10: Conclusion|290
3|10.1 Understanding Australia’s Committees of Influence|290
3|10.2 Understanding Parliamentary Committees as a System Is the Key to Improving Their Rights-Protecting Capacity|291
3|10.3 New Perspectives on Australia’s Parliamentary Model of Rights Protection|295
3|10.4 Conclusion|299
3|References|301
4|Books/Articles/ Reports/Speeches|301
1|Preface|9
1|Acknowledgements|11
1|Contents|12
1|List of Acronyms and Abbreviations|16
1|List of Tables|18
1|Part I: Parliamentary Committees and Rights Protection in Australia|19
2|Chapter 1: Introduction|20
3|1.1 Why Study Parliamentary Committees?|20
4|1.1.1 Why Is This Research Unique?|24
4|1.1.2 Why Use Counter-Terrorism Law as a Case Study?|25
4|1.1.3 What ‘Rights’ Are Considered?|27
3|1.2 Parliamentary Committees and Rights Protection in Australia|30
3|1.3 Scepticism About the Parliamentary Model of Rights Protection|30
3|1.4 Overcoming Scepticism About the Parliamentary Model of Rights Protection|34
3|1.5 Structure and Overview of Chapters|39
3|References|40
4|Legal Materials|40
4|Cases|40
4|Legislation|40
4|International Law Materials|41
4|Books/Articles/Reports/Speeches|41
2|Chapter 2: Methodology|47
3|2.1 Assessing Parliamentary Committees|47
3|2.2 The Assessment Framework Adopted in This Book|49
3|2.3 Key Steps in the Assessment Framework|50
4|2.3.1 Legislative Impact|52
4|2.3.2 Public Impact|52
4|2.3.3 Hidden Impact|53
3|References|53
4|Books/Articles/Reports/Speeches|53
2|Chapter 3: The Australian Landscape and the Making of Counter-Terrorism Laws|56
3|3.1 The Parliamentary Committee System and the Australian Parliament|56
4|3.1.1 The Constitutional Understanding of the Role of Parliament|56
4|3.1.2 Parliamentary Committees and Parliamentary Lawmaking|59
3|3.2 The Emergence of the Australian Parliamentary Committee System|61
3|3.3 Committees Examined in Detail in this Book|64
4|3.3.1 Senate Scrutiny of Bills Committee|64
5|3.3.1.1 Membership, Scrutiny Mandate and Outputs|64
5|3.3.1.2 A Technical Scrutiny Committee?|66
4|3.3.2 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security|66
4|3.3.3 Senate Standing Committees on Legal and Constitutional Affairs|68
4|3.3.4 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights|71
5|3.3.4.1 Membership, Mandate and Outputs|71
5|3.3.4.2 A ‘Dialogue-Creating’ Committee?|73
4|3.3.5 Non-Parliamentary Scrutiny Bodies|74
3|3.4 Counter-Terrorism Law Making in Australia|75
4|3.4.1 The First Tranche: The Howard Government’s Response to ‘September 11’ (2001–2003)|77
4|3.4.2 The Second Tranche: Pre-charge Detention and Protection of Security Information (2004–2005)|79
4|3.4.3 The Third Tranche: Control Orders and Preventative Detention Orders (2005)|80
4|3.4.4 Time for Review: Parliamentary and Judicial Review of Counter-Terrorism Laws (2005–2008)|82
4|3.4.5 The Fourth Tranche: Updating Australia’s Counter-Terrorism Framework (2008–2010)|84
4|3.4.6 The Fifth Tranche: Dealing with ‘Home-Grown’ Terrorism (2013–2018)|86
4|3.4.7 The Sixth Tranche: Post-Conviction Controls and Response to Cyber-Terrorism (2016–2019)|88
3|3.5 Institutional Engagement on Rights Issues and the Impact of Parliamentary Committees|90
3|References|91
4|Cases|91
4|Bills|91
4|Legislation|93
4|International Law Materials|93
4|Parliamentary Materials|94
4|Standing Orders|94
4|Parliamentary Debates|94
4|Parliamentary Committee Reports|94
4|Books/Articles/ Reports/Speeches|96
4|Websites|102
1|Part II: Applying the Assessment Framework|103
2|Chapter 4: Participation and Legitimacy|104
3|4.1 Why Look for Key Participants and Evidence of Legitimacy?|104
4|4.1.1 Who Are the Key Participants?|105
4|4.1.2 Rates and Diversity of Participation|105
5|4.1.2.1 Strong Performer: The LCA Committees|105
5|4.1.2.2 A Narrower Range of Participants for the Technical Scrutiny Committees|112
5|4.1.2.3 The PJCIS Experience|112
5|4.1.2.4 The Usual Suspects|114
3|4.2 Evidence of Legitimacy|116
4|4.2.1 The Challenge of Gathering Views on Legitimacy|116
4|4.2.2 A Spectrum of Legitimacy among Committees|117
4|4.2.3 Tensions Between the Deliberative and Authoritative Attributes of Committees|117
5|4.2.3.1 SSCSB|119
5|4.2.3.2 PJCIS|120
5|4.2.3.3 LCA Committees|122
5|4.2.3.4 PJCHR|123
6|(i) The Contested Role and Purpose of the PJCHR|124
6|(ii) Structural and Procedural Risks to PJCHR’s Legitimacy|127
6|(iii) Clarifying the Role and Rights Contribution of the PJCHR|128
3|4.3 Summary of Findings on Legitimacy|129
3|References|130
4|Bills|130
4|Legislation|130
4|Parliamentary Committee Reports|130
4|Books/Articles/Reports/Speeches|131
2|Chapter 5: Legislative Impact|133
3|5.1 Why Look for Legislative Impact?|133
3|5.2 Evidence of Legislative Impact|137
3|5.3 Three ‘Phases’ of Parliamentary Scrutiny of the Case Study Bills|138
4|5.3.1 Phase 1: Fast and Furious Scrutiny|138
5|5.3.1.1 The SLAT Acts (CSA 1)|139
5|5.3.1.2 ASIO Bill 2002 and ASIO Act 2003 (CSA 2 and 3)|140
5|5.3.1.3 Anti-Terrorism Act 2004 (CSA 4)|144
5|5.3.1.4 National Security Information (Criminal Proceedings) Bill 2004 (Cth)|146
5|5.3.1.5 The Control Orders Act (CSA 6)|148
4|5.3.2 Phase 2: Consolidating Reform of Counter-Terrorism Laws|150
5|5.3.2.1 The INSLM Act (CSA 7)|150
5|5.3.2.2 National Security Legislation Amendment Act 2010 (Cth) (CSA 8)|152
4|5.3.3 Phase 3: The Rise of the PJCIS and the Introduction of the PJCHR|155
5|5.3.3.1 The Data Retention Act (CSA 10)|156
5|5.3.3.2 The Foreign Fighters Act 2014 (CSA 11)|160
5|5.3.3.3 Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Act (No 1) 2014 (Cth) (CSA 10)|163
5|5.3.3.4 The Citizenship Act (CSA 12)|165
5|5.3.3.5 The High Risk Offenders Act (CSA 13)|167
5|5.3.3.6 The Encryption Act (CSA 14)|171
5|5.3.3.7 The TEO Bill (CSA 15)|175
5|5.3.3.8 An Epilogue: The Identity Matching Laws|180
3|5.4 Summary of Findings on Legislative Impact|181
3|References|184
4|Bills|184
4|Explanatory Memorandum|186
4|Legislation|187
4|Parliamentary Debates|188
4|Parliamentary Committee Reports|188
4|Books/Articles/Reports/Speeches|192
2|Chapter 6: Public Impact|196
3|6.1 Why Look for Public Impact?|196
3|6.2 Time for Parliamentary Scrutiny and Debate|198
4|6.2.1 Period Between Introduction and Enactment|199
3|6.3 Influence of Parliamentary Committees on the Public Debate on the Case Study Bills|204
4|6.3.1 Parliamentary Debates|204
4|6.3.2 Signs of an Emerging Rights-Scrutiny Culture within the Federal Parliament|206
3|6.4 Media Commentary|210
3|6.5 Influence of Formal Parliamentary Scrutiny on Post-Enactment Review of the Case Study Bills|214
3|6.6 Summary of Findings on Public Impact|217
3|References|218
4|Bills|218
4|Explanatory Memorandum|218
4|Standing Orders|219
4|Parliamentary Committee Reports|219
4|Books/Articles/Reports/Speeches|219
2|Chapter 7: Hidden Impact|222
3|7.1 Why Look for Hidden or Behind-the-Scenes Impact of Parliamentary Committees?|222
3|7.2 Documentary Evidence|224
3|7.3 Interview Material|226
4|7.3.1 The ‘Technical Scrutiny’ Committees|226
4|7.3.2 The ‘Inquiry-Based’ Committees|231
3|7.4 Summary of Findings on Hidden Impact|234
3|References|235
4|Parliamentary Committee Reports|235
4|Books/Articles/Reports/Speeches|236
1|Part III: Improving the Rights-Protecting Capacity of the Parliamentary Committee System|238
2|References|241
3|Books/Articles/Speeches|241
2|Chapter 8: Capitalising on the Rights-Protecting Potential of the System of Parliamentary Committees|242
3|8.1 A Diversity of Attributes Is Key to Improving Rights Impacts|242
3|8.2 Inquiry-Based Committees Can Provide a Meaningful Deliberative Forum|243
3|8.3 Technical Scrutiny Committees Provide Vital Resources for Those Engaged in the Public Inquiry Process|245
3|8.4 Investing in the System of Committees|247
4|8.4.1 Improving Communication Between Committees and Key Participants|248
4|8.4.2 Increasing Committee Resources and Adopting Strategies to Address High Workloads and Ensure Timely Tabling of Reports|250
4|8.4.3 Encouraging Multi-committee Scrutiny of Rights-Engaging Bills|252
4|8.4.4 Documenting and Acknowledging the Contribution Parliamentary Committees Make to a Common Rights-Scrutiny Culture Within the Australian Parliament|255
3|References|261
4|Standing Orders|261
4|Parliamentary Committee Reports|261
4|Books/Articles/Reports/Speeches|261
4|Websites|264
2|Chapter 9: Refining the Roles and Promoting the Strengths of Individual Committees within the System|265
3|9.1 Implications for Individual Committees Within the System|265
3|9.2 LCA Committees and Other Senate Legislation Committees|266
3|9.3 PJCIS and Other Statutory Based, Subject-Specialist Committees|270
3|9.4 SSCSB and the SSCRO|274
3|9.5 PJCHR|278
3|9.6 Summary of Committee-Specific Reforms|286
3|References|287
4|Standing Orders|287
4|Parliamentary Committee Reports|287
4|Books/Articles/Reports/Speeches|287
2|Chapter 10: Conclusion|290
3|10.1 Understanding Australia’s Committees of Influence|290
3|10.2 Understanding Parliamentary Committees as a System Is the Key to Improving Their Rights-Protecting Capacity|291
3|10.3 New Perspectives on Australia’s Parliamentary Model of Rights Protection|295
3|10.4 Conclusion|299
3|References|301
4|Books/Articles/ Reports/Speeches|301