Dissenting
Report
Australian Greens
The Australian Greens do not support the recommendation
made in this report to pass the Defence Legislation (Miscellaneous Amendments)
Bill 2008 without amendment.
The Greens do support two thirds of this Bill. There are good
reasons for, and international consensus on, the establishment of the ‘Red
Crystal’ as an alternative symbol to the Red Cross and Red Crescent because it
does not have religious, cultural or political connotations. The Greens also
support dental care being provided to ADF members and their families. However,
amendments to the Defence (Special Undertakings) Act 1952 making Pine Gap a
'special Defence undertaking' and a 'prohibited area' are excessive, corrosive
of democratic principles and should not be supported.
Neither the government nor
the Committee make an adequate case as to why an enhanced ability to prosecute
offenders is required. Adequate legislation already exists to protect Pine Gap
from trespass or acts of aggression, in particular, the Crimes Act of 1914.
As noted in the Committee's
report, the amendments related to Pine Gap were drafted in direct response to
the failed attempt by the Howard government to use the Defence (Special
Undertakings) Act for the first time against four Christian pacifists, who
entered Pine Gap after informing the Defence Minister and the media of their
intention to conduct a peaceful and nonviolent "citizens inspection"
of the facility. Given this forewarning, it would appear that what this "core
element of Australia's national security" lacks is not
legislative protection, but perimeter patrols. If it is indeed such a
sophisticated intelligence gathering facility, the capacity to gather
intelligence about its immediate environment needs to be enhanced.
Despite engaging an army of
QCs, at taxpayer's expense, to inflict the maximum punishment and to place
maximum limitation on the court hearing the defence's justification and legal
argument, the Northern Territory Court of Criminal Appeal quashed the convictions
of the Christian pacifists. The court found that citizens had the right to
challenge whether the 'prohibited area' was necessary for the purpose of the
defence of Australia. While the Committee's report
dismisses concerns made in submissions as unrelated to the amendments, the
Australian Greens find that questions about whether the facility contributes to
the defence of Australia as highly relevant, as did the
Northern Territory Court of Criminal Appeal.
Given this series of events, the amendments proposed in
this legislation can be accurately described as "retrospective
revenge" that would "punish and frighten those thinking about
engaging in non-violent resistance against Pine Gap's role in war making,"
as several submissions stated. The amendments would inhibit citizens from ever
challenging whether Pine Gap is necessary for Australia's defence in future,
which is an erosion of the democratic rights of which Australians are proud.
It is ironic that the democratically elected members of
the Australian Parliament are being asked to enact legislation on a facility
about which Australian parliamentarians know so very little. In 1999 the
government refused to provide information about Pine Gap to the Joint Standing
Committee on Treaties – information that is made freely available to members of
the US Congress. Nothing has changed since then. Although US Congress
officials have visited Pine Gap and received classified briefings about its
functions, elected representatives and Senators are "entrusted with less
information than can be found in a public library".
The history of
disinformation and misinformation about Pine Gap is long. In 1966, Australians
were told the facility was to be a weather station. Later the official cover
was a "Space Research Centre". Australians have the right to know
what is happening on Australian soil at one of largest and most sophisticated
satellite ground stations in the world. Information is still not forthcoming
about who is being spied upon, and who is being targeted through this
facility? Was it used to coordinate air strikes against Iraqi citizens in a
war accurately described by the UN Secretary General and other leaders as an
illegal war? How is it used to support US nuclear war fighting capabilities,
and how is that consistent with our government's efforts towards nuclear
disarmament?
If Pine Gap is indeed a 'core element' of Australia's national security,
Australians have a right to know how and why. Rather than making the case for
the proposed amendments, the government has described citizens exercising their
democratic right to protest as "mischief makers" and have furnished
the Committee with statements such as, "Pine Gap makes an important
contribution to the security interests of both Australia and the United States
of America...The methods used for collecting intelligence at the facility are
sensitive..." which are not convincing or compelling, and neither are the
arguments made in the Committee's report.
Rather than being convinced that Pine Gap does protect
Australians, the Senate is being asked to enact legislation that would further
shield Pine Gap from Australians. Such efforts to erode democratic
rights are unsupportable and run directly counter to the kind of
"security" we need.
SENATOR SCOTT LUDLAM
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page