Since 9/11 counter-terrorism has been a significant concern for Australian governments:

• Economically, with over $8.3 billion spent to 2006;
• Legislatively, with 41 Commonwealth laws enacted or amended, and dozens more introduced or amended by each of the states and territories;
• Administratively, with new structures developed (eg National Counter-Terrorism Committee, state and territory counterparts, national coordination and functional committees such as the Transport Security Working Group) and existing agencies having their powers, resources and budgets significantly boosted; and
• Socially and culturally, with public engagement programs including information campaigns, alerts, and specific policies directed at Muslim communities.

As a result, counter-terrorism in Australia has changed fundamentally in a short period of time, from ad hoc reactive responses to rare events (eg the Hilton bombing) with no specific anti-terror laws, to a situation of multiple laws, bodies, plans, organising committees and strategies to respond to terrorism as a large-scale, ongoing, proactive, cross-government priority. Homeland security to date has been seen as a crime problem, requiring a policing response. Responses have focused on new offences and sanctions, new powers for policing and security agencies to prevent and detect crimes, and new systems of surveillance and intelligence gathering to aid those agencies. The process has been radical rather than evolutionary, and on-going rather than confined to one point in time. It has been driven by external events, so that after each occurrence such as 9/11, and the Bali, Indonesian, and London bombings, a new wave of counter-terror legislation, policy, funding, initiatives and administrative approaches has occurred. The process has been necessarily crisis-driven and ad hoc, rather than ordered and cohesive.

Anti-terrorism law reform in Australia has proceeded without a comprehensive detailed audit of existing powers and criminal offences, or examination of research findings or ‘best practice’ from overseas jurisdictions. There is an urgent need to develop an evidence-based approach to public policy and law reform in this field.

This project includes the following parts:

1. A systematic audit of counter-terrorism legislation within Australia (and selected overseas jurisdictions), to provide a complete picture of current legal frameworks and their emergence since 9/11.
2. A cross-jurisdictional comparative analysis of Australian counter-terror laws to examine differences (eg in powers, oversight arrangements, offences and sanctions) and how they impact on policing (eg cross-border law enforcement, gaps and duplication).
3. An implementation study of the direct, indirect and unintended effects of the new legal rules, and how institutional arrangements, resources, processes and practices that have developed around them reflect or modify the original purposes behind the legislation.
4. Identification of innovative counter-terrorism responses eg exploring the role of third parties (eg owners of private infrastructure, financial institutions, chemical retailers, regulators).
5. An analysis of post 9/11 shifts in the boundaries of domestic counter-terrorism responsibilities of police, security and military agencies, and how they impact on policing (eg in determining authority and achieving coordination).
6. The development of policy options for improving the consistency, implementation and effectiveness of counter-terrorism law and policy responses.