Australian Human Rights Commission Australia and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), Shadow report to the CERD Committee – 8 July 2010 Terrorism, UN Doc A/HRC/4/26/Add.3 (2006) at http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G06/155/49/PDF/G0615549.pdf?OpenElement; UN Committee against Torture, Concluding Observations: Australia (2008), para 3. The Law Council of Australia has also expressed concern at the enactment of non-association provisions in criminal legislation. These provisions, modelled on pre-existing provisions directed at terrorist organisations, seek to extend the traditional boundaries of criminal liability to capture conduct which is not linked to the commission or planned commission of any specific offence, but which is alleged to facilitate criminal activity on a broader level. The Law Council of Australia notes: In shifting the focus of criminal liability from a person’s conduct to their associations, offences of this type unduly burden freedom of association and are likely to have a disproportionately harsh effect on certain sections of the population who, simply because of their familial or community connections, may be exposed to the risk of criminal sanction. These non-association provisions, recently incorporated into State and Territory criminal laws and the Commonwealth Criminal Code, have been justified by the need to address serious and organised crime, and in some jurisdictions, specifically directed at motorcycle gangs. Often the non-association provisions have been accompanied by powers for law enforcement officers or the courts to make ‘control orders’ restricting the liberty of persons who are members of or associated with criminal organisations. 106 A submission to the Commission for the UPR notes that “the Australian Government refuses to independently investigate the torture and ill treatment of both David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib whilst rendered and illegally detained in Guantanamo Bay. David Hicks is still living under a suspended sentence due to an unlawful conviction (the charges were retrospective and not even legitimate war crimes, not to mention the plea was signed under duress). David Hicks was placed on a gag order and provisions that are outlined in the plea agreement interfere directly with his freedom of expression. He was placed on a control order which severely impinged on his human rights (freedom of expression, movement, association etc).” It urges that “the Australian Government undertake an independent, thorough and binding investigation into the allegations of torture and ill treatment made by the Australians rendered and illegally detained at Guantanamo Bay, the Government’s involvement in the treatment, and the subsequent legality of the conviction of David Hicks and their involvement in the process.” 107 There have been positive developments in addressing these issues, such as recent changes to the People Trafficking Visa Framework and the Support for Victims of People Trafficking Program but the Commission is concerned that trafficking in person and related offences do not comprehensively reflect Australia’s international legal obligations in this area, or that there are always effective remedies available. See further: Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Elizabeth Broderick, ‘For trafficked people, Government changes put human rights first’, media release (17 June 2009), http://www.hreoc.gov.au/about/media/media_releases/2009/50_09.html (viewed 21 April 2010). The Commission also acknowledges the Government’s 2008 publication of ‘Guidelines for NGOs working with trafficked people’ and an accompanying two-page ‘Know Your Rights’ fact sheet. See: http://www.hreoc.gov.au/sex_discrimination/publication/traffic_NGO/index.html (viewed 19 April 2010). The Commission is only aware of one award of compensation to a person who was trafficked to Australia, see: N Craig, ‘Sex slave victim wins abuse claim – EXCLUSIVE - ‘It still hurts to talk about it ... I have been depressed’, The Age, (29 May 2007). For discussion of another effort to obtain compensation in a trafficking case see J Lewis, ‘Out of the Shadows’, Law Society Journal (February 2007) 17; and E Broderick and B Byrnes, Beyond Wei Tang: Do Australia’s human trafficking laws fully reflect Australia’s international human rights obligations? (Speech delivered at Workshop on Legal and Criminal Justice Responses Trafficking in Persons in Australia: Obstacles, Opportunities and Best Practice, Monash University, 9 November 2009). There have been limited legal actions to address trafficking in Australia. See further: A Scholenhardt, G Beirne and T Corsbie, ‘Human Trafficking and Sexual Servitude in Australia’ (2009), 32(1) UNSW Law Journal, 27. 108 United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, note, para 23. 109 In 2001, the Migration Act was amended to designate a number of islands as ‘excised offshore places’. A person who becomes an unlawful non-citizen (a non-citizen without a valid visa) by entering Australia at such 59