Secret Warrants and Secret Searches

The NSW Police Force have hit the jackpot on this one. A change to the law is going to allow police to apply for a secret warrant, conduct a secret search, and then inform the target of the warrant and search some three years later. In that funny in a perverse kind of a way, the police powers as they relate to criminal activity such as murder, computer crimes, corruption, money laundering, and sexual offenses, among others, are much broader than they are for crimes such as terrorism.

I am all for reducing and eliminating crime. I am also all for the protection of people's civil liberties and basic human rights. It might be a fine balance that needs to be struck, but it is a balance that must be found and so struck. It is outrageous in my mind that police can covertly search your home and property without your knowledge. And, that they can do it impersonating someone else, such as an electrician or something.

The problem as I see it is that a covert search is going to be sans independent supervision of the process. This is undoubtedly going to lead to claims of the planting of evidence. Running a video camera is hardly going to be a convincing mechanism to prove that the searchers were at all times being videoed. I would much prefer that warrants be served and the target of that warrant be allowed to watch what happens as there home and property is searched.

It is a scary thought that people unknown to you and without your knowledge can be in your home and rifling through your property, and doing God knows what.

The warrants do have some restrictions. The offense must carry a maximum prison term of seven years. The warrants can only be issued by designated Supreme Court judges, and the judge must be convinced that the evidence sort is going to be found in the premises or on the property searched within 10 days of the warrant being issued.

Nevertheless, it is an extraordinary power considering most people would consider their home their castle and as such free from covert searches.

These are indeed interesting times that we live in.

Kentucky Fried Chicken & PETA

Kentucky Fried Chicken or as it is better known KFC came into the sites of the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals or as they are better known PETA. It seems that PETA has a problem with the way KFC treats their chickens. in factories and slaughterhouses. The thing about PETA protests is that the generally bring out the crowds for a bit of a perv as they normally involve some degree of nudity. PETA's protests against fur are legendary for the bare-breasted women. Now it seems that chickens are getting the bare-breasted treatment as well.

The three women were bare-breasted and wearing skimpy yellow bikini bottoms (look at the photo yourself -- I have attached it for your viewing pleasure). The protest took place in the Sydney CBD during the lunch hour. Maximum exposure for maximum effect, I guess. The three were in a cage and holding signs that read, "Chicks Agree: Boycott KFC".

The protesters -- Ashley Fruno, Fawn Porter (Fawn is a great name for a PETA activist), and Carla Lobos were eventually arrested and then claimed they were roughed up by police. The police, obviously, have denied this and also denied they used the additional powers that they have been granted for the month of July to cover the WYD activities. I would imagine that naked or semi-naked women would not be so much of an annoyance but rather a test of a pilgrim's faith!

The young women think that their protest has been successful and that they have educated the masses about the cruel practices of KFC. Judging by the attached photo they did more educating on the semi-naked form of women by the number of mobile phone cameras taking pictures.

Pamela Anderson is a PETA fan and gave Jessica Simpson a serve recently over a t-shirt that read, "Real Men Eat Meat". Pam has also recently been starring in Australia's version of Big Brother and while here also protesting in front of KFC. Unfortunately, Pam's protest was top on as opposed to topless, which was undoubtedly disappointing for many.

The end result is that KFC still feels that its treatment of its chickens is ethical. I think this is because they have not been deemed to have broken any laws. I would have thought that PETA would have been advocating a vegan lifestyle and not just better treatment of animals that are to be slaughtered.

Oh well!

World Youth Day -- Annoying T-Shirts

The annoying t-shirts that are likely to get their next airing once WYD gets underway were part of a fashion demonstration in front of the NSW Parliament building earlier today. Some of the slogans that front the t-shirts include "Pope Go Homo" and "The Pope Is Wrong - Put a Condom On".

There are certain to be protests in spite of the new powers that police have been given. Every single WYD has been subject to protest and the slogans above highlight who is likely to be coming out to protest.

Let the fun and games begin!

Human Rights, Freedom of Speech, and the Catholic Church

It would seem that not all Catholics are thrilled about the new annoyance laws put into place to "guarantee" that pilgrims are not annoyed or inconvenienced during the World Youth Day festivities.

Father Frank Brennan (pictured), who also happens to be a lawyer, feels that the new police powers are not only excessive but an interference of the civil liberties of people and in fact the new laws run contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church. Fr. Brennan cites the Pacem In Terris, the 1963 encyclical of Pope John, where it is clear that responsibility of all authorities was "to safeguard the inviolable rights of the human person". Perhaps the NSW Government has interpreted this to mean the inviolable rights of the Catholic pilgrim.

However, the Catholic Church holds no such reservations. The Church has in fact indicated that it fully supports the laws and that it lobbied the government to ensure that the laws were enacted on the grounds that everyone wants WYD to be held in Sydney and that the people of Sydney, not only the pilgrims, were in favour of such measures because they want the event, which will be full of enthusiasm and joy, to run smoothly. I am not sure who the Catholic Church has been talking to on this.

Whether the laws are contrary to Catholic teachings is neither here nor there in that sense. I would have thought that pedophilia was contrary to Catholic teachings as well but it still happens. The laws are simply an affront to basic human rights that the majority of us take for granted but that the Catholic Church does not. In any event putting laws like this into place is like showing a red rag to a bull. Those groups that might not have been inclined to protest will now come out of the woodwork and protest on principle.

It is interesting that the organizers of the WYD and the Catholic Church want to have their cake and eat it too. An argument could be made that Jesus was the protester of his time. There were many in power who disagreed with his message and his teachings for which Jesus paid the ultimate price. The analogy drawn by Dr John Sweeney, the co-ordinator of research at the Edmund Rice Centre, says the following, "It would rather be like Jesus calling for a police escort on Palm Sunday. Obviously, he wouldn't and when Jesus went into Jerusalem people yelled out things the religious leaders in their time didn't like and they rebuked Jesus and he said he couldn't quieten his supporters."

This is a thought worth pondering. If Jesus really was about free speech and the right to preach his message then isn't it a little rich that the organizers want to curtail that very freedom for which Jesus died?

As you can see these increased police powers bother me.

World Youth Day -- The Annoyance Provisions

Here is a copy of the relevant articles from the amendment regulation that many have claimed are an affront to civil liberties and free speech.

The actual regulation in full can be found here.

7 Control of conduct within World Youth Day declared areas
(1) An authorised person may direct a person within a World Youth
Day declared area to cease engaging in conduct that:
(a) is a risk to the safety of the person or others, or
(b) causes annoyance or inconvenience to participants in a
World Youth Day event, or
(c) obstructs a World Youth Day event.
(2) A person must not, without reasonable excuse, fail to comply
with a direction given to the person under subclause (1).
Maximum penalty: 50 penalty units.
(3) A person is not guilty of an offence under this clause unless it is
established that the authorised person warned the person that a
failure to comply with the direction is an offence.
(4) In this clause, authorised person means:
(a) a police officer, or
(b) a member of an SES unit (within the meaning of the State
Emergency Service Act 1989) or a member of the NSW
Rural Fire Service, but only if the member is authorised by
the Authority in writing for the purposes of this clause.

8 Request to undergo search as condition of entry to World Youth
Day declared areas
(1) For the purpose of promoting safety and security within a World
Youth Day declared area, a person’s entry to the World Youth
Day declared area (or any part of the area) is subject to the
condition that the person must comply with such of the following
requests as may be made of the person:
(a) a request by a search officer that the person undergo a
search conducted by electronic means (such as by passing
an electronic detection device over or in close proximity to
the person or by the person passing through a detection
device),
(b) a request by a search officer that the person allow a search
of articles in the person’s possession and identify articles
in the person’s possession,
(c) a request by a search officer that the person remove his or
her overcoat, coat or jacket or similar article of clothing
and any gloves, shoes and hat (or other headwear), and
allow an examination of those items,

(d) if the person enters in a vehicle or vessel—a request by a
search officer that the person open the vehicle or vessel, or
part of it, for inspection and allow the vehicle, vessel or
part to be searched.
(2) A search officer may exclude a person who refuses such a request
from entry to the World Youth Day declared area or part of the
area concerned. Reasonable force may be used to effect the
person’s exclusion.
(3) In this clause, search officer means:
(a) a police officer, or
(b) a member of an SES unit (within the meaning of the State
Emergency Service Act 1989) or a member of the NSW
Rural Fire Service, but only where the member is assisting
one or more police officers at a point of entry to a World
Youth Day declared area or part of such an area.

Happy Reading! By the way the cartoon can be found here.

"Causing Annoyance" -- World Youth Day

It seems that New South Wales is bending over backwards to accommodate those running the World Youth Day festivities later this month. Although considering some parts of the history of the Catholic Church it might feel to some as they are bending over forwards and getting the right religious shafting. This is one of those things you read or hear and then find yourself asking yourself is this for real.

The NSW police have been given additional powers during the World Youth Day festivities to arrest and fine people for "causing annoyance" to participants or as they are more frequently called pilgrims! These powers include a power to search and the power is based on the mere belief that someone is causing annoyance.

As Anna Katzmann SC, President of the NSW Bar Association, points out, there are already laws on the NSW Statute Books which regulate behaviour and police powers at large events like New Year's Eve on Sydney Harbour which attracts up to a million visitors or more. These regulations seem to work well enough at other events so what is different this time around?

Under the new powers if I was to hold up a sign that read "the Pope allows pedophilia" then I have committed an offence and can be arrested and fined. Where is my right to freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Simply, if I wanted to hold up a poster that said "Kevin Rudd is a wanker" then I am entitled to do so and I would not be arrested. So, why does the Pope get special treatment? Is it because he is Catholic? or the Special Emissary of God?

The special powers granted to police also allow them to conduct searches in designated areas that may require people to remove jackets, gloves, shoes, and head wear, as well as offer up any bags for a police search.

It is not surprising that the NSW Police Commissioner, Andrew Scipione, is in favour of the new powers. He even goes so far as to say that they are not really new powers but the extension of already existing powers. So, really they are new powers after all. This seems to me like the NSW Police have thought all their Christmases have come at once as this is the perfect ruse to clamp down on protests and protesters.

The powers are draconian and seem only to have been put into place so that visiting Catholics and the Pope think that all Sydney-siders are for this little love fest. I wonder if NSW would be going to the same lengths to appease organizers if this event were some kind of Jewish, Protestant, or Muslim love fest?