Recommendation 3: An issuing court should explicitly be required to make the best interests of the child a primary consideration at all stages in proceedings relating to the potential issue of an interim or confirmed control order. Recommendation 4: A court appointed advocate should be entitled to participate in all proceedings related to a control order, including closed hearings, and be entitled to review all the materials put before the court, including material that is sensitive for national security reasons. Recommendation 5: A court appointed advocate should be required to possess relevant expertise in working with children and the development of the child Recommendation 6: in addition to the appointment of the appointed advocate, a child should be provided with security-cleared legal representation in all control order proceedings, and their lawyer should be entitled to attend and participate in all proceedings relating to the control order. Recommendation 7: it should be a requirement that whenever a control order is imposed in relation to a person under 18 years of age, any obligations, prohibitions and restrictions imposed should constitute the least interference with the child’s liberty, privacy or freedom of movement that is necessary in all the circumstances. Recommendation 8: The Commission recommends that the amendments to the preventative detention order regime contained in Schedule 5 of the Bill not be passed. Recommendation 9: Schedules 8, 9 and 10 of the Bill should not be passed. In the trial that this recommendation is not accepted, the Bill should be amended to ensure that: Monitoring warrants and control order warrants should only be granted where the relevant authority is satisfied that there are no less intrusive means of obtaining the information, and Monitoring warrants and control order warrants should only be available where a relevant authority is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect non-compliance with a control order. Recommendation 10: If Schedule 15 is passed, it should be amended so that: a legal representative with an appropriate security clearance may not be excluded from control order proceedings
Recommendation 3: An issuing court should explicitly be required to make the best interests of the child a primary consideration at all stages in proceedings relating to the potential issue of an interim or confirmed control order. Recommendation 4: A court appointed advocate should be entitled to participate in all proceedings related to a control order, including closed hearings, and be entitled to review all the materials put before the court, including material that is sensitive for national security reasons. Recommendation 5: A court appointed advocate should be required to possess relevant expertise in working with children and the development of the child Recommendation 6: in addition to the appointment of the appointed advocate, a child should be provided with security-cleared legal representation in all control order proceedings, and their lawyer should be entitled to attend and participate in all proceedings relating to the control order. Recommendation 7: it should be a requirement that whenever a control order is imposed in relation to a person under 18 years of age, any obligations, prohibitions and restrictions imposed should constitute the least interference with the child’s liberty, privacy or freedom of movement that is necessary in all the circumstances. Recommendation 8: The Commission recommends that the amendments to the preventative detention order regime contained in Schedule 5 of the Bill not be passed. Recommendation 9: Schedules 8, 9 and 10 of the Bill should not be passed. In the that this recommendation is not accepted, the Bill should be amended to ensure that: Monitoring warrants and control order warrants should only be granted where the relevant authority is satisfied that there are no less intrusive means of obtaining the information, and Monitoring warrants and control order warrants should only be available where a relevant authority is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to suspect non-compliance with a control order. Recommendation 10: If Schedule 15 is passed, it should be amended so that: a legal representative with an appropriate security clearance may not be excluded from control order proceedings trial
09122015_counter-terrorism_legislation_amendment_bill.docx