The Australian Greens say new figures on the use of police powers point to the need to drop draconian counter-terrorism laws.
Federal law enforcement agencies have yet to use any preventative detention orders, despite having the power to do so for a decade.
Since control orders were introduced only four have been issued to federal police - three of which were issued between December 2014 and March 2015, and one in September 2015.
The 2015/16 annual report on control orders and preventative detention orders, tabled in federal parliament on Friday, shows no PDOs were issued, one control order was issued and a second control order was reaffirmed and amended.
Greens justice spokesman Nick McKim said the powers ran contrary to the rule of law and the presumption of innocence, and undermined Australians' basic rights.
"There's no evidence that these kinds of measures make our community any safer, and the government manifestly failed to make the case for these changes," Senator McKim told AAP on Monday.
"We're glad they are being used sparingly, but history is full of cases where powers created unnecessarily have later been abused.
"Existing police powers were always adequate and these laws should be repealed."
Police can detain people under PDOs where there is a threat of an imminent terrorist attack and the order might help prevent it, or immediately after a terrorist act if it is likely vital evidence will be lost.
A person can be detained for a maximum of 48 hours under commonwealth law, 14 days under state and territory laws and 14 days under a combination of commonwealth and state and territory regimes.
The law applies to children as young as 14.
Control orders can be used if they substantially help prevent a terrorist attack, the person has trained with a terrorist organisation or engaged in a hostile activity in a foreign country, or been convicted in Australia of a terrorism offence.
They can stop a person from being in certain areas, leaving Australia, communicating or associating with certain people, owning or using certain things, carrying out certain activities and accessing the internet.
In 2013, a majority of those involved in COAG review recommended preventative detention legislation be repealed, but there was no consensus.
A spokesman for Attorney-General George Brandis said control orders and preventative detention were part of a broader suite of options law enforcement could use to fight terrorism.
They were meant to be used in specific circumstances and the government still believes they were worth having on the books.
Shadow attorney-general Mark Dreyfus said control orders were "reserved for exceptional circumstances, and should be used only rarely".
"Labor supported this legislation with amendments when it was introduced, and will continue to support measures that keep Australians safe."
CONTROL ORDERS
2009 - 0
2010 - 0
2011-12 - 0
2012-13 - 0
2013-14 - 0
2014-15 - 3 (Two on Dec 17, 2014; one on March 5, 2015.)
2015-16 - 1 (one made September 10, 2015; one reconfirmed and varied November 30, 2015)
No preventative detention orders issued.
(Source: Attorney-General's Department report)
An AFP spokesman told AAP preventative detention orders are "one of the tools" available to law enforcement to prevent or disrupt a terrorism attack.
"PDOs are assessed for use against other legislation available to law enforcement to prevent or disrupt a terrorism attack," the spokesman said.
Share
