Malcolm Turnbull will ask the states to implement a uniform law that would allow terrorism suspects to be detained for questioning without charge for up to 14 days.
The prime minister’s renewed push to achieve nationally consistent pre-charge detention laws will come at a special meeting of the Council of Australian Governments on Thursday, which will also discuss new commonwealth criminal offences for people in possession of instructional terrorist material, and people who engage in terrorism hoaxes.
As well as pushing state leaders to adopt an existing New South Wales law which allows terror suspects to be detained for 14 days, Turnbull is also seeking agreement to double the initial investigation period where terror suspects are held in detention from four, to eight, hours.
The leaders will also discuss adopting national facial biometric matching capability, and a greater role for the military in responding to terrorism incidents.
Thursday’s special Coag meeting was scheduled in June to consider Australia’s counter-terrorism policy framework after a discussion midyear about a nationally consistent approach to bail and parole for terror suspects.
After an initially acrimonious war of words between Turnbull and the Victorian premier, Daniel Andrews – leaders in June resolved to strengthen laws to create a presumption against bail and parole for people who have demonstrated support for or have links to terrorist activity.
The prime minister sparked the political furore over parole midyear by questioning how a Melbourne gunman responsible for an attack in Brighton, Yacqub Khayre, was allowed out on parole given he had been in prison for a violent offence.
Andrews responded to Turnbull’s criticism by declaring he would bring his own plan to Coag proposing the federal government take control of parole decisions for prisoners on the terror watch list.
According to the Coag agenda for Thursday’s meeting, leaders will discuss the new parole regime agreed in June, and the Turnbull government’s strategy for protecting crowded places from terror attacks.
They will also consider enhanced aviation security measures, and the use of an emergency alert system for national security incidents.
There will also be a discussion about countering radicalisation and violent extremism, including in prison-based rehabilitation programs.
The prime minister said it was “vital” that Australia have nationally consistent counter-terrorism regulations.
“I’m asking state and territory leaders to work with me to deliver safety and security,” Turnbull said. “We need nationally consistent pre-charge detention laws so that those who seek to do us harm can be held to account no matter where they are.
“People who are using the internet to spread terrorist propaganda and instructions will be tracked down and caught. They must face the full force of the law.”
The debate about pre-charge detention regimes has played out in the Coag forum since December 2015. Most states have laws that allow terror suspects to be detained without charge for a maximum of seven days.
In April 2016 leaders agreed in principle to the NSW law as the basis for a strengthened, nationally consistent, pre-charge detention scheme for terrorism suspects, with the ACT government reserving its position.
In 2015 Turnbull said there were constitutional impediments to the commonwealth government legislating for pre-charge detention “of the period that our security services believe is necessary or is appropriate”.
He said that meant the government would work with the states, which didn’t face the same legal limitations.
But in the lead-up to Thursday’s discussion, the commonwealth is understood to have considered some additional safeguards that could address the constitutional concerns.
The two new terrorism offences under consideration could criminalise the possession of instructional terrorist material that is likely to be of practical use to someone preparing for or engaging in a terrorist act.
Government officials say establishing a strong deterrent would give law enforcement agencies the ability to respond to behaviour and activity at the lower end of the risk spectrum, where a person is in possession of instructional terrorist material but has not necessarily developed the capability or intent to commit a terrorist act.
The new hoax offence would take into account examples such as falsely claiming a knife or vehicle attack in a public place, in addition to traditional hoaxes such as those involving explosives or harmful substances.
