NZ PM talks changes to anti-terror laws similar to Australia
New Zealand is considering detaining people with terrorist links on the grounds they may commit crimes. Prime Minister John Key said on Sunday he was concerned there was a risk of New Zealanders travelling to Iraq or Syria to support the Islamic State group and then coming home. …
Cabinet will consider what changes should occur rapidly.
“Potentially we would have greater powers and potentially even powers to look at arresting someone under the view that they would undertake what would then be deemed to be a criminal act. “That’s a very big step – I’m not saying we will take that.”
Yes, our PM is considering bringing in thoughtcrime. Guilt by association. Detaining people because they may commit a crime. It’s contrary to every legal principle that I’m aware of (not a lawyer), and certainly to natural justice. And he’ll do it too, unless there is resounding protest.
A good weekend piece by Andrea Vance sets out four reasons that Key shouldn’t be trusted on spying:
Reasons to doubt Key’s spy overhaul
1. TERROR THREAT ALERT: UNKNOWN
… No evidence is publicly available to show New Zealand is facing an increased risk. … Key talks about national security issues only when it suits a political end, so on this impending Islamist onslaught we have only his word.
2. IS THAT GOOD ENOUGH?
No. To date, on high-profile intelligence matters, Key has been slippery. …
3. WHY SO SECRET?
The public has again been kept in the dark about intelligence plans. …
4. IS THIS REALLY ABOUT THE -UP IN THE MIDDLE EAST?
Fighting alongside Isis and Jabhat Al-Nusra is already a criminal offence. … Experts suspicious of the expansion of surveillance powers in Australia have judged they have nothing to do with jihadis – and are aimed at countering economic espionage …
Paul Buchanan agrees:
Meanwhile, an international security expert has accused the Prime Minister of “scaremongering” to build a case for war by claiming New Zealand could face domestic beheading threats. … International security expert Paul Buchanan said the claims were “absurd”. “He’s building a case for war. He’s pulled the beheading imagery out for what I think are spurious purposes.”
Final word to Phil Stevens:
Lying is bad.
Lying in order to make others fearful is far worse.
Using fear stoked by lies to take away human rights is despicable.
— Phil Stevens (@stevens_phil) October 11, 2014