A Comparison of Australian and Canadian Anti-terrorism Laws

Abstract

There are many areas of convergence between Australian and Canadian anti-terrorism laws. Yet, there are substantial differences between anti-terrorism laws in the two countries. A number of hypotheses can be presented to explain the significant divergences between Australian and Canadian anti-terrorism law, for example, the Canadian law is subject to a constitutional bill of rights, the Charter, which Australia does not have. This article compares Australian and Canadian antiterrorism laws by exploring areas such as definitions of terrorism, terrorism offences, ASIO (Australian Security Intelligence Organisation) questioning powers and Canadian investigative hearings, preventive detention and control orders, national security confidentiality, proscribed terrorist organisations, and lastly speech associated with terrorism. The Canadian response to terrorism has generally been more restrained and more reflective of rights concerns while the Australian response has generally been more robust and reflective of security concerns.

Keywords: anti-terrorism law, Australia, Canada, Bill of Rights, security