The federal government is in talks with the states and territories about revisions to Australia's anti-terror laws after two reports recently tabled in parliament recommended wholesale changes.
Civil liberty groups have long taken issue with the Howard-era laws ushered in after the September 11 terror attacks on the United States.
Now, the Attorney-General's Department says it will consider winding back powers granted to ASIO and the Australian Federal Police which the reports' authors say have had little effect in the fight against terrorism.
News that makes sense
Your trusted source for staying up-to-date with the world around you. Get free daily news updates and analysis, straight to your inbox.
Darren Mara has this report.
Lawyers and liberties groups have welcomed two reports to federal parliament calling for sweeping changes to Australia's counter-terrorism laws.
The powers of the spy agency ASIO would be wound back under the recommendations, and offences described by some as "Orwellian", scrapped.
Rob Stary represented the first Australian charged under anti-terrorism laws, Jack Thomas, and has a scathing assessment of the September 11th-inspired crackdown.
"We have really over-reacted and over-reached. Their breadth was so so enormous. Ridiculous really."
Jack Thomas, referred to in the media as "Jihad Jack", had been charged with receiving funds from al-Qaeda.
Although his conviction was quashed on appeal, his movements were still severely restricted under a so-called control order.
Rob Stary says the reports under consideration now call for major reform, including the overhaul of such orders.
"The legislation is draconian. The mistake the Australian parliament made I think was simply trying to transpose what was happening in the UK, or in western Europe or in the US to Australian conditions."
One of the reports, by the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor, Bret Walker, also recommends an end to preventative detention for terror suspects.
In his paper, Mr Walker says police should instead rely on their regular powers to take action against terror suspects.
In a blow to spy agency ASIO's tactics, the independent monitor wants major changes, including a review of the definition of terrorism itself.
The Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus says it's a question of balance.
"....between the need to protect Australians, to protect the community against terrorist activity and balancing that against protecting our rights and freedoms."
Mr Dreyfus says the government will take time to consider Mr Walker's recommendations, as well as those made in a separate report by a special committee of the Council of Australian Governments.
That committee's recommendations include adding a "hoax threat" and psychological harm to the definition of a terrorist act.
It also says the offence of praising a terrorist act should be repealed because it's too broad and ill-defined.
While civil liberty groups will be hoping the government will take up the bulk of the recommendations, the Attorney-General says recent terror attacks in the US could influence his decision.
"We have had a very stark reminder just in the last short period with these bombings in Boston of the possibility of a terror act occuring anywhere in the world."
Other proposed changes in the two reports include giving judges a greater role in the questioning of terror suspects, reducing the penalty for revealing ASIO contact from five to two years' prison, and placing strict limits on any curfews imposed by the agency.
Steven Blanks from the New South Wales Council of Civil Liberties says the reports are a vindication for civil libertarians and those interested in good governance.
"The laws which were introduced in many cases were brought in a knee-jerk reaction, in a great rush and in an environment where rational public debate just wasn't possible. It's good to see that when these laws are carefully reviewed by people who don't have vested interests on one side or the other that they come up with the sorts of recommended changes that civil libertarians have been talking about for a long time."
Senior lecturer in international relations at the Australian National University, Dr Michael McKinley, says the proposed legislative changes would be unlikely to raise the terror threat in Australia.
"I think it's highly unlikely. One thing we know about terrorists is that they pay very scant regard to legislation which is on the statute books. They are determined in their activities by things other than the legality of their actions."
