2009
DOI: 10.1080/10345329.2009.12035823
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Legislation We Had to Have?: TheCrimes (Criminal Organisations Control) Act 2009 (NSW)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The legislative approach to OMGs adopted in the SA Act and its successors was modelled on the terrorism laws (Redmond, 2008;Loughnan, 2009). With the exception of the Queensland legislation (which differs in detail from that of the other states), the OMG laws do not require the court to find that a member has engaged in illegal activity before imposing a control order upon him.…”
Section: A Fresh Approach?mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The legislative approach to OMGs adopted in the SA Act and its successors was modelled on the terrorism laws (Redmond, 2008;Loughnan, 2009). With the exception of the Queensland legislation (which differs in detail from that of the other states), the OMG laws do not require the court to find that a member has engaged in illegal activity before imposing a control order upon him.…”
Section: A Fresh Approach?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The breach of an order can attract criminal penalties, including imprisonment. The laws have been widely criticized as unconstitutional and non-compliant with the rule of law and human rights (see for example Bronitt & McSherry, 2010;Cowdery, 2009;Gray, 2009;Loughnan, 2009). Lawyers and academics have expressed concern about the way in which these laws institute a procedure that enables OMG members to be deprived of some of the liberties available to any ordinary person because of their identity as an OMG member and in the absence of evidence grounding a prosecution for specific illegal conduct, or even for conspiracy.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since at least 2008, the production of organised crime and bikie gangs as a serious threat has been a unifying theme in political discourse justifying the formal expansion of criminalisation across Australia nationally (Ayling 2011). The designation of 'declared organisations' and associated control orders has been well critiqued as eroding fundamental rights and criminal law norms in NSW (Cowdery 2009;Loughnan 2009;McGarrity 2012). However, while these trends around organised crime are prefigured by an expansive regime of counter-terrorism laws over the last 15 years (Loughnan 2009;McGarrity 2012), the so-called 'pre-emptive turn' has a longer history.…”
Section: Political Contextsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The designation of 'declared organisations' and associated control orders has been well critiqued as eroding fundamental rights and criminal law norms in NSW (Cowdery 2009;Loughnan 2009;McGarrity 2012). However, while these trends around organised crime are prefigured by an expansive regime of counter-terrorism laws over the last 15 years (Loughnan 2009;McGarrity 2012), the so-called 'pre-emptive turn' has a longer history. The rise of pre-emptive criminalisation targeted to associations and membership for threats of 'serious crime' must be understood in the context of older, settler-colonial formations of criminalisation.…”
Section: Political Contextsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, and relatedly, another manifestation of the influence of 'law and order' politics in NSW is that, even when the Legislative Review Committee does have the opportunity to consider a bill at length prior to enactment and raises significant rights and liberties concerns, its capacity to influence criminal law-making is confounded by the bipartisanship that frequently surrounds punitive criminalisation directed at 'demonised' targets (Poynting and Morgan 2007;Cohen 1972 At the heart of the control order regime is the pre-emptive criminalisation of association between individuals who are considered to pose a risk of future criminal behaviour (Brown et al 2015(Brown et al :1219. Such regimes are controversial crime prevention methods (Ashworth and Zedner 2014), and have been widely criticised for extending the net of criminalisation too far (Cowdery 2009;Loughnan 2009). Unsurprisingly, when the Legislation Review Committee considered the Crimes (Criminal Organisations Control) Bill 2012 (NSW), it identified a range of concerns in terms of the bill's implications for rights and liberties.…”
Section: Illustrations Of the Committee/law-making Relationshipmentioning
confidence: 99%