The Australian military could be called out to terrorist and riot events with greater ease and gain limited shoot-to-kill powers under legal changes being pushed by the federal government.
The attorney general, Christian Porter, announced the proposed changes on Thursday, along with a separate measure to ban convicted and accused domestic abusers of cross-examining witnesses in the family court.
Under the military legal changes, defence personnel such as special forces could be called out when it is assessed they can “enhance” the response by state police. Soldiers would take orders from the military on requests from the state police.
The current law allows a state to request military help from the commonwealth when police are overwhelmed or incapable of handling the situation.
The military will also have “shoot to kill” powers but they could only be used when there is a reasonable prospect force is necessary to protect life, the same standard that applies to police.
The federal government has consulted states, territories, police and the military after a review of the deadly Lindt cafe siege in May 2017 recommended a review of military call-out arrangements.
Porter told ABC News Breakfast that the threshold that operated during the 2014 siege was “very high [and] very inflexible”.
“It doesn’t ask the fundamentally important question which is whether or not there are particular skills or assets that the ADF might be able to bring into play which would help save Australian lives,” he said.
Porter said the ADF could help in drawn-out sieges, widespread coordinated terrorist attacks that require a “land and air” response, and chemical or biological attacks.
It was “impossibly difficult” to say if the law would have changed the outcome of the Lindt siege, in which the cafe manager, Tori Johnson, and barrister Katrina Dawson died.
Porter defended including widespread rioting as one of the incidents of “domestic violence” that would enliven the power to call in the military, arguing it was the constitutional term that granted power to the federal government.
He said there had been an “evolution of terrorist events” that made it difficult “distinguishing between one type of violence and another”.
He warned terrorists could use that uncertainty as “cover” if riots were excluded, citing the Paris attacks as an example where it was not clear at first it was a terrorist attack.
Earlier he said it was “almost inconceivable” and “pretty fanciful” the ADF would be called to deal with a riot.
In a second, unrelated legal change announced on Thursday, Porter said that where there were “clear allegations” or convictions for violent offences, the perpetrator of the violence should not be able to cross-examine the victim in family court matters. Instead, cross-examination must be conducted by counsel.
Porter said that had occurred only 170 times in the past two years, and the legal change would bring family law into line with rules for criminal matters which ban an alleged rapist from cross-examining the victim.
Women’s Legal Services Queensland congratulated the Turnbull government on the measure but asked for assurances that the family court would not lose its specialists under a restructure announced by the attorney general in May.
Angela Lynch, its chief executive, said, “The act of personal cross-examination by a perpetrator of violence of their victim causes significant harm, re-traumatises victims, and is questionable regarding the quality of the evidence produced.
“However, the success of the new bill is predicated on adequate funding for legal services to conduct the cross-examinations and the ability of the courts to identify that domestic violence is an issue in any given case.”
