CHAPTER 3


CHAPTER 3

ANNUAL REPORTS ON THE OPERATION OF ACTS & PROGRAMS

3.1        Standing Order 25(20) does not provide for consideration of reports on the implementation or operation of Acts or programs. The committee is not therefore required to include them in its report on the examination of annual reports. However, the committee chose on this occasion to examine in some detail the following reports:

  • Report to the Attorney-General on the results of inspections of records under  s 55 of the Surveillance Devices Act 2004 (published by the Commonwealth Ombudsman);

  • Protection visa processing taking more than 90 days for the reporting period   1 July 2007 to 31 October 2007 (published by DIAC); and

  • Report pursuant to Section 440a of the Migration Act on the conduct of Refugee Review Tribunal Reviews not completed within 90 days for the period 1 July 2007 to 31 October 2007 (published by the Refugee Review Tribunal).

 

Report under the Surveillance Devices Act 2004

3.2        The Surveillance Devices Act 2004 (the Act) regulates the use of surveillance devices by law enforcement agencies.[1] Subsection 55(1) of the Act requires the Ombudsman to inspect the records of each law enforcement agency to determine the extent of compliance with the Act by the agency and its law enforcement officers.[2]

Privacy Issues

3.3        The Ombudsman reported concerns in relation to compliance with section 16(2)(c) of the Act.[3] Section 16(2)(c) states that in determining whether to issue a surveillance device warrant, the issuing officer must have regard to the extent to which the privacy of any person is likely to be affected.[4] In relation to AFP compliance with this section of the Act the Ombudsman found that:

Although most warrant applications made reference to the effect of the surveillance device would have on privacy, there was a general lack of detail, and some applications did not make any reference to privacy. This issue has been noted in all previous inspection reports to the AFP. While we note an improvement in the number of applications addressing privacy and the manner in which they do so, there remains scope for improvement.[5]

3.4        The committee has previously noted the Ombudsman's concerns relating to AFP compliance with paragraph 16(2)(c) of the Act[6] and is disappointed to see that the Ombudsman has had to raise these issues again. The committee was particularly concerned to read that this issue has been raised in all previous inspection reports to the AFP. The committee encourages the AFP to examine why these problems have occurred and take appropriate corrective action.


Protection visa processing and reviews taking more than 90 days

3.5        Section 65A of the Migration Act imposes a requirement for the Minister to make a decision on a protection visa application within 90 days of the lodgement of the application. If this target is exceeded, under section 91Y of the Migration Act the Secretary of the Department of Immigration and Citizenship is required to report on protection visa applications for which decision making has taken over 90 days. Similarly, section 440A requires the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) to report on reviews not completed within 90 days. The Department and the RRT are required to report every four months with the latest reporting period being 1 July 2007 to 31 October 2007. In this report, the committee has considered the outcomes reported in the three previous reporting periods.

Protection Visa processing taking more than 90 days

3.6        The table below compares protection visa processing by DIAC taking more than 90 days for the three previous reporting periods:

 

1 November 2006 to 28 February 2007

1 March 2007 to 30 June 2007

31 July 2007 to 31 October 2007

Total number undecided outside of 90 day period

325

373

241

Total number decided outside of 90 day period

284

503

529

Total number processed outside of 90 day period

609

876

770

Percentage of total applications processed outside of 90 day period

18.5%

27.6%

29.3%

3.7        The committee notes that there has been an increase in the percentage of protection visas processed outside of 90 days. However, the committee also notes that this is largely due to factors outside DIAC's control.[7]

Refugee Review Tribunal reviews not completed within 90 days

3.8        This table outlines RRT reviews not completed within 90 days, compared with reviews completed within 90 days, for the previous three reporting periods:

 

1 November 2006 to 28 February 2007

1 March 2007 to 30 June 2007

1 July 2007 to 31 October 2007

Reviews completed outside of 90 days

243(22%)

177(22%)

201(26%)

Reviews completed within 90 days

873(78%)

642(78%)

578(74%)

Total

1116

819

779

 

Senator Trish Crossin
Committee Chair

Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page