Australian Human Rights Commission Information for LOIPR - Australia, 27 June 2016 63. The Commission welcomes the appointment of the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor (INSLM), the Hon Roger Gyles AO QC on an acting basis on 11 December 2014 by the then Prime Minister. The GovernorGeneral appointed Mr Gyles as the INSLM, for a period of two years on 20 August 2015.54 64. The INSLM has produced several reports,55 including: • Report on the impact on journalists of section 35P of the ASIO Act • Control Order Safeguards (INSLM) Report Special Advocates and the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill (No 1) 2015 • Control Order Safeguards Part 2. 65. The INSLM has raised concerns regarding control orders and other issues. It is unclear, at this time, whether the INSLM’s recommendations to moderate counter-terrorism laws will be implemented. 66. Issue for consideration in the LOIPR: Information on the implementation of the recommendations of the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor. 9. Immigration detention and asylum seeker policy 9.1 Non-refoulement Concluding Observations, para 15 Relevant provisions of the CAT: Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 11 and 16 67. The Commission notes the continuation of Operation Sovereign Borders, a military-led border security operation which aims to counter people smuggling, including through preventing the entry to Australia of boats carrying asylum seekers. As part of Operation Sovereign Borders, boats have been intercepted and returned to their point of departure ‘where it is safe to do so’. At least 20 boats carrying over 600 people have been returned in this manner since Operation Sovereign Borders commenced.56 68. Prior to being returned under Operation Sovereign Borders, asylum seekers undergo a screening process to determine whether Australia has protection obligations towards them. This process takes place at sea, via teleconference, and while the person is effectively being detained on board an Australian vessel. 69. The Commission is concerned that the process does not constitute a fair or thorough assessment of protection claims for the following reasons: • Interviews may be brief and insufficiently detailed or probing to ensure that all relevant protection claims are raised. 13