Torch relay brings burning legal questions

WEDNESDAY 16 APRIL 2008

Two academics at The Australian National University are warning that legal clarification may be needed to establish the precise role Chinese Olympic Officials will be playing when they accompany the Olympic torch as it makes its way around Canberra.

ANU College of Law scholars Professor Don Rothwell and Dr Gregor Urbas argue that following comments yesterday by Australian IOC member Kevan Gosper, various legal issues around the Olympic torch relay needed to be clarified.

“No role can be taken in law enforcement or the provision of protection or security for the Olympic torch unless expressly provided for under Australian law,” said Professor Rothwell. “While exceptions are made from time to time for visiting foreign military forces or dedicated security personnel protecting visiting foreign government leaders, it would be extraordinary if Chinese Olympic officials were given exemptions under the International Organisations (Privileges and Immunities) Act of the Commonwealth in this instance.

“Any suggestions that the Australian Army would be called out to assist the Australian Federal Police in providing protection for the flame whilst in Canberra would also be an exceptional use of powers under the Defence Act. While there is a provision for the ‘call-out’ of the Army to deal with instances of domestic disturbance in the ACT which are beyond the control of the ACT authorities, in the absence of a known terrorist threat any use of the Army in these circumstances would be an unprecedented use of these powers,” he said.

Dr Urbas, an expert on criminal law and policing added that certain ‘major events’ can be used to extend police powers.

“The Major Events Security Act 2000 (ACT) allows the ACT government to declare an event such as a national or international sporting competition or associated event to be a ‘major event’ if satisfied that this is reasonable and necessary for the safety of people attending the event and to prevent its disruption,” he said. “This allows police providing security to prohibit items that may be used to disrupt the event from being taken to its location. It is an offence under the Act to obtain unauthorised access to the location of the event or to disrupt or interfere with the event, or to behave in an harassing, intimidating or violent manner at the event.

In relation to the question of what level of force may be used to deal with protestors, Dr Urbas noted: “The Australian Federal Police (AFP) in its ACT policing capacity uses a range of methods to respond to violent or volatile situations. The Specialist Response and Security (SRS) tem may be called on to assist in such situations, and this group is authorised and trained in the use of Taser weapons,” he said.

For more information or to arrange interviews:
Professor Don Rothwell – (02) 6125 8948 / 0414 546 830
Martyn Pearce, ANU Media Office – (02) 6125 5575 / 0416 249 245