Judicialization or Renunciation? Judges in Today’s Landscape of Anti-Terrorism Laws

Judges in constitutional democracies face common dilemmas navigating today’s landscape of anti-terrorism laws. Whether it is with respect to the oversight of investigative detentions or approval of control orders, security certifi cates, and other offi cial powers calculated to investigate and prevent terrorism and related activities, the judicial role has expanded into fi elds where the appropriate balancing of security concerns with individual liberties is exceedingly complex.  The need for such balancing is, of course, one of the central justifications for judicial involvement: the judiciary is relied upon to bring characteristicindependence and integrity to the review of official powers, ensuring compliance betweenthe latter and the higher law of the Constitution.  There is nevertheless an unsettling implication that sometimes attends judicial service in these fields — namely, it is not always clear whether the judicial role is truly one of constitutional enforcement and oversight, or one that allows administrative actors to borrow the integrity of the courts in furtherance of constitutionally-suspect ends.</jats:p

Combating Organized Crime Aussie-Style: From Law Enforcement to Prevention

A growing recognition of the threats posed by organized criminal activity at both domestic and international levels and of the need to work collaboratively to meet them has seen an escalation in Australian policy and legislation on organized crime in recent years. At the national level, the Australian Crime Commission has produced biannual organized crime assessments, and the Australian government has developed a National Organized Crime Response Plan (2015–2018) that includes multi-agency initiatives to share information and establish infrastructure for police from all jurisdictions to conduct joint operations. Police powers in many Australian jurisdictions have also been expanded (for example, through the introduction of unexplained wealth laws)

From Bikers to Savvy Criminals. Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs in Australia: Implications for Legislators and Law Enforcement

This article will examine outlaw motorcycle gang criminality in Australia and the difficulties faced by legislators and law enforcement agencies in responding to this concern. Adding further complication to the issue for the state is addressing the trepidation and disdain toward outlaw motorcycle gang behaviour that is commonplace in contemporary society. Beyond traditional criminal gang enterprise such as episodic inter-gang or more widespread violence and drug manufacture or distribution, a shift in sophistication by outlaw motorcycle gangs toward more diversified criminal enterprise has emerged. These ventures include money laundering and tactical collaboration with other crime groups and engagement with external expertise for example. Further, an expansion of legitimate business activity by outlaw motorcycle gangs which often enables other crime operations creates a more difficult landscape for legislators and law enforcement agencies to address outlaw motorcycle gang criminality. This has resulted in the emergence of populace anti-gang or anti-association type legal scaffolding to address these agents in the Australian criminal justice setting. However, the success or otherwise of these controversial legislative developments remains unclear as does the impact of law enforcement on domestic outlaw motorcycle gang criminality