The Act at the head of this scrutiny is the Criminal Organisations Act ; assented to by the Queensland Government on the tierce of December 2009. The Act was enacted as a supposed “ solution ” to the alleged rise in bikie related offense. It is defined by the Queensland Government ( 2009 ) as:
An Act to supply for the devising of declarations and orders for the intent of interrupting and curtailing the activities of administrations involved in serious condemnable activity, and of their members and associates, and to do related amendments to other Acts.
The Explanatory Memoranda which was issued alongside the Act as a signifier of justification for its debut declares that ‘the construction and methods of organized offense [ posed ] a challenge to the condemnable justness system which is by and large designed to prosecute and penalize isolated offenses committed by persons ‘ ( Queensland Government, 2009 ) . As a consequence of this evident inability to aim organized offense, the Government went on to state that it hoped that the Act would supply an ‘alternate method ‘ of combat. As a consequence of this justification, the Act allows groups to be punished for the offenses of a individual member significance whole groups of potentially guiltless people are being targeted as opposed to merely the one or more cardinal members who have committed the offense.
The execution of this act every bit good as the Queensland Government ‘s push to implement anti-bikie pack statute law encourages libel of the inexperienced person and prejudice within society. After reexamining the statute law nevertheless it is apparent that this bias non merely exists within society but extends every bit far as both the Australian judicial and parliamentary systems. By using this statute law the Government is ignoring the most fundamental of all rights ; the right to natural justness. Each and every Australian citizen has the cardinal human right to be perceived without prejudice whether it is existent, imputed or evident. This right, nevertheless, is being denied by the presence of this self-contradictory edict.
Under the current anti-bikie statute law the province will be given absolute power to curtail the cardinal rights of association via a closed tribunal. This procedure will restrict the right of the accused ‘s canvasser to prove or even see grounds filed against their client ( Hurst, 2012 ) . Based on in secret tendered grounds, an administration can be branded as condemnable and a individual can be made susceptible to an anti-association order for a maximal term of two old ages. Mr Sprigborg on the Liberal National party said in 2009 that “ This measure is a abhorrent onslaught on the rights and autonomies of persons and will non be supported by the LNP ” ( Springborg, 2009 ) . He so remarked that members of the party can experience good cognizing that they have contested these Torahs which extinguish centuries of established natural justness rights. He stated that they will besides kip good cognizing that they fought to keep the cardinal right to freedom of association ( Hurst, 2012 ) .
The Robina Shopping Centre shot of 2011 was extremely disseminated and widely publicised throughout Queensland. Queenslanders, every bit good as Australians in general, are expected, encouraged even, to huddle at the reference of the words “ bikie pack ” . The media proclaims that all members of bikie packs are barbarous criminals entwined in a barbarous black market of money laundering, drug trafficking and weaponries covering. The intelligence shriek messages about the legion slayings that have alleged ties to bikie packs such as the ill-famed Bandidos or Hells Angels but what about the remainder of them? The hiting involved two and merely two members of rival bike packs. These two persons nevertheless were non publicised as much for their improper actions but instead for their ties to motorbike packs. What about those rockerss who pay revenue enhancements, work honest occupations, support households or even those on the other terminal of the spectrum, those who partake in charity drives and present teddy bears to vomit kids?
The now Government backed calumny and slander of those in bikie packs is unjustly based on the repute of a choice few pack members who are known to take part in organized offense. Many rockerss are being falsely and unjustly branded as law-breaking, drug covering felons and are being grouped with others unlike themselves merely because they have a common avocation ; they wear gang colorss or may hold a certain stereotyped visual aspect about them. A spokesman for the Brotherhood Christian Motorcycle Club Mr Greg HirstA provinces that by censoring the insignia etc. associated with being a bikie, the offense and force itself is non being addressed and in world merely attacks the civilization and a certain manner of life ( Hurst, 2012 ) . Mr. Russel Wattie, former member of an friendless bike nine subscribes to the impression that although many bikies involve themselves in condemnable activity, these activities are committed by many other persons and groups within society. He says that a huge 90 % of bikies do non partake in illegal chases and that it is the staying 10 % that the media and public choose to concentrate and establish their premises on. Mr. Wattie asserts that there is small reference about those club members who simply enjoy siting bikes and that there is no reference of the bond shared by members allow entirely the charity activity that many nines take portion in ( Maloney, 2012 ) .
Not merely will present this prohibition promote this libel but it will do those who do non take part in condemnable activities guilty by association. This prejudice has even been adopted by the Queensland bench system. Like it or non, says lawyer Eric Parker, juries hate rockerss. He explains that traping this hatred and obvious prejudice on the figure of “ close girls ” experienced by car drivers is a important underestimate of the category battle between two and four wheel vehicles every bit good as the huge cultural differences that command their operation ( Parker, 2011 ) .The slander of the bikie name has come from overemphasis on a little minority of condemnable rockerss and with a colored jury the figure of supposed felons is increasing quickly. The name of a biker is going progressively worse, non needfully due to actions undertaken by rockerss themselves but due to negative public perceptual experience, fuelled by undeserved and frequently inaccurate media in concurrence with fanatic Government focal point. The media focuses on the turning figure of drive-by taws and airdrome brawlers and label them motorcycle riders when, in world, the bulk of them merely on occasion throw a leg over a bike. Due to this media guess the Government has been forced to move but have done so improperly and irrationally.
There is already equal statute law in topographic point that trades with Condemnable Administrations such as bikie packs and it is entirely due to the deficiency of finding of the Queensland Government that bias ordinances are being introduced to the province. By using this statute law and keeping the Criminal Organisations Act 2009, the Government is promoting a universe in which people are judged for the apparels that they wear merely because they represent a impression unfamiliar to most, a universe in which people are criminalised for a avocation that harms none, a universe in which 1 could be incarcerated for disbursement clip with friends and loved 1s. The Queensland authorities is non merely defaming a specific group of people but is besides compromising the unity of the province ‘s judiciary systems as has been proven in both New South Wales and South Australia with the overruling of similar edicts.
In 2009 the NSW Government introduced statute law known as the Crimes ( Criminal Organisations Control ) Act. This was aimed at commanding the behavior of bikie packs following an incident at Sydney airdrome in which Anthony Zervas, a Hells Angels associate, was killed by members of a rival pack known as the Commancheros.A Although it was created for the intent of commanding Bikie gangs the word “ administration ” is defined as “ two or more people ” go forthing a yawning loophole leting for ordinary citizens to be targeted ; be it inadvertent or not.. The statute law targeted bikie packs and attempted to declare them, every bit good as folds of bike pack members, improper. Under the act, Bikie pack members were prevented from working certain occupations and could hold their assets seized by the authorities, without warning. In 2011 a member of the Hells Angels bikie pack Derek Wainohu applied to hold the jurisprudence declared invalid. In Wainohu v New South Wales the High tribunal ruled that the statute law was so invalid as it undermined the institutional unity of the Supreme Court of NSW due to the deficiency of duty to give grounds for doing such a declaration. The tribunal besides discovered that the Torahs were outside the parametric quantities of the legislative power of the NSW authorities ( Wainohu v State of New South Wales, 2011 ) . The statute law was established on uncorroborated prejudice and is a premier illustration of how injustice in relation to bikie packs has infiltrated Australian statute law.
The overruling of colored bikie Torahs in NSW was so mirrored in 2010 after the South Australian authorities attempted to implement a similar edict in 2008. It contained a figure of similarities to the Crimes Act in add-on to eliminating a individual ‘s fundamental right to autonomously rebut and contend allegations made against their name ( Fewster ; Todd, 2010 ) . South Australian Premier Mike Rann ‘s enterprise to make away with bikie packs was non merely grossly unsuccessful but incorporate, politicised and legalised non merely bikie packs in general but illegitimate packs every bit good. On top of his effort to outlaw bikie packs Mr Rann declared that anyone who associated six or more times with a member of a condemnable administration could be jailed for up to five old ages ( Berkovic & A ; Massola, 2010 ) significance that a individual could be incarcerated for disbursement clip with friends and household. Not merely did this fail flagrantly, the High Court ‘s rejection of the statute law left taxpayers to compensate 100s of 1000s of dollars to members of the Finks Motorcycle Gang in order to counterbalance them for legal costs. If the jurisprudence had non been eradicated, it would hold obliged the province ‘s tribunals to enforce control orders on bikies without any grounds being tendered. The High Court ruled that it was unconstitutional as it undermined the independency of Judgess and forced them to happen guilt based entirely on premises.
Nicholas Cowdery, New South Wales Director of public prosecutions who incarcerates bikies on a regular footing, believes that the Queensland Criminal Organisations Act will be vetoed for hindering on basic rights. Mr. Cowdery believes that the deficiency of edification of Australian bike packs compared to those in the US mean that the act will non work in Queensland ( REFERENCE ) . He states that the offenses committed by Australian bikies are ordinary offenses such as drug and vehicle offenses which are largely conducted by persons and merely seldom by a pack. Mr. Cowdery concedes that there are nines like the Hells Angels which are involved in more sophisticated offenses ; specifically the importing, industry and distribution of contraband. The bulk of bike packs nevertheless are non this organised he adds and states further “ I think we are over-reacting to a limited menace of organized condemnable behavior for which our bing Torahs are absolutely equal ” ( REFERENCE ) . Mr. Cowdery understands that whilst the Queensland theoretical account may be somewhat less obnoxious that those enacted in New South Wales and South Australia, he maintains that it is still a significant divergency from the province ‘s legal principals. He deems the anti-bikie Torahs to be in direct misdemeanor of freedom of association, freedom of look, the right to work and familial and friendly relationships ( REFERENCE ) .
There is no demand for extraordinary steps or intemperate legislative alterations. What ‘s needed is likely rather simple. Funding and political support for difficult, long draw investigative and prosecutorial work that lasts beyond the exhilaration of the intelligence rhythm, and patience plenty to allow the constabulary bring to bear the resources they require. Alternatively of trying to implement new Torahs that basically trade name all members of bike packs as felons, the authorities should alternatively be turn toing the deficiency of action being taken by constabulary and covering with rockerss who are interrupting the jurisprudence with statute law already at their disposal. The Criminal Code itself is more than adequate when covering with any illegal activity by any individual in the community, even including ‘bikies ‘ . In 1977 a list of cardinal bikies connected to organized offense and illegal activity was identified and yet shortly after the list was compiled Police stopped supervising the packs. Due to the inactivity of Police, these choice members continued to stretch the boundaries and give all bikies a bad name every bit good as showing to the populace that they are untouchable. The constabulary took on the attack that if you do n’t look you do n’t happen the job and if you do n’t happen a job you do n’t necessitate to react with expensive probes. The sarcasm of this attack is prevailing due to the fact that they so had to pass even more money on judicial proceeding disbursals when seeking to warrant the Torahs put in topographic point as a consequence of their refusal to move.
After reading the above study, it has become progressively clear “ The Queensland Government ‘s Criminal Organisations Act 2009 every bit good as their efforts to implement anti-bikie pack Torahs are unconstitutional and deny natural justness. The Act and proposed statute law are in no manner the most effectual mechanisms for covering with offense committed by members of bikie packs and were suggested entirely due to the deficiency of action taken by constabulary ” . However, through the successful execution of the aforesaid recommendations, these failings could really rapidly and easy be repaired, go oning modern-day Australia ‘s repute of being a safe, multicultural city. Through increasing the velocity with which claims are processed there will be fewer instances left expecting blessing, therefore leting for instances affecting kids to be rushed through the procedure. Additionally, the recommissioning of offshore installations allows for more balanced intervention of these refugees, minimising discriminatory intervention every bit good as supplying a solid educational and fiscal base for these people. By doing full usage of these installations the extradition procedure is simplified, every bit good as safeguarding against unrefined individuals from leaking into the state. The immense addition in refugees admitted by Australia each twelvemonth holds a double benefit, adding to the state ‘s already diverse civilization even farther, every bit good as promoting refuge searchers to expect relocation in cantonments instead than to put on the line their lives traversing the ocean. By amending current statute law to embrace the aforesaid declarations the Australian authorities would be taking immense stairss in the right way to go a universe leader in the in-migration jurisprudence sector, eventually supplying a safe topographic point for these people to drop ground tackle.