What a sin! The National Press Club actually had the temerity to invite bikers and, an even worse devil, an academic, to address their members! After decades of weekly rants from pompous politicians and bloated businessmen they broke from tradition and dived into the dark side.

Even worse the bikers and academic questioned the wisdom of politicians making stupid laws. As if our moral and upright legislators would ever push the “lock them up and throw away the key button” just to win over the law and order vote.

But make no mistake the South Australian and New South Wales laws are particularly stupid. Forget about the blatant violation that these laws bring to the justice system and just think about their consequences.

They will drive biker groups underground, make them less able to be scrutinised by police forces and undoubtedly push them more towards violence.

Look at the Canadian experience; in 1997 the Quebec government introduced C95, the “participation in a criminal organisation” legislation that the Australian laws mirror. Ten years later the Royal Canadian Mounted Police reported that there have been 85 murders and 92 attempted murders relating to Quebec’s biker wars as well as 129 arson attacks and 82 bombings. Hardly a great success story.

Sure, earlier this year the cops arrested 156 bikers, most from the Hells Angels. But no one is suggesting that the club or other so-called “outlaw” biker gangs are out of business. Instead, their activity has changed becoming displaced and more submerged. Anyone who believes that individuals or groups in this country will not adapt to the draconian association laws in the same way as their Canadian counterparts has simply not studied the history of organised crime.

As Sydney lawyer Phillip Boulton SC perceptively noted if people are already killing and shooting each other then any new laws will not stop them meeting “and having a beer together”.

Admittedly our biker groups are pussies in comparison with their Quebec brothers. Recent figures presented to the Joint Parliamentary Committee to Review the Australian Crime Commission’s Serious and Organised Crimes Act by Dr Art Veno and Superintendent Scott White of the New South Wales Police are revealing. They show that gang-related violence generated by street, ethnic and biker groups represents just 0.6% of all crime with Biker-related violence estimated to account for 0.3% of crime in total.

No one, let alone me, suggests that some bikers in some clubs aren’t involved in drug-running and violence. But do we really want to pour millions and millions of extra dollars into policing the relatively small amount of crime they commit when rampant political and police corruption, drunken youth street violence and major white collar crime that devastates the lives of thousands of Australians are still serious problems?

Indeed a strong case could be made for association laws for these groups rather than for bikers or, for that matter, churches that hide paedophile priests or law societies that fail to take action against crooked lawyers.

David Penberthy mocks the possibility of these laws being used against groups other than bikers. Has he forgotten the attempts by Menzies to bring such laws against the communist party in 1950? Sure, the Methodist Ladies Temperance Union might not be a target but some groups in the sex industry may be at risk and also some radical unions or religious groups labelled as “extremists.” Given recent events why not the Somalians?

Mark Le Grand, a former director of the official misconduct division of the Criminal Justice Commission also headed the investigation of organised crime for the National Crime Authority. He can hardly be considered a fan of bikers but created, in The Australian, earlier this year, a hypothetical scenario where Premier Nathan Rees fell foul of these provisions.

Le Grand, in this scenario, showed how these laws shredded the traditional laws of evidence and the presumption of innocence and because your may not be allowed to see the evidence against you, made appealing them almost impossible.

The fact that these laws target individuals and groups for what they might have done, rather than for what they have done, makes them unique. Technically they are laws of what is called attainder, introduced by English kings centuries ago as a convenient way to convict their subjects and rivals without a messy trial. It was what Churchill wanted to do to Hitler and his leadership if he ever captured them – summary execution without a trial.

Sensibly his Cabinet rejected Churchill’s plea as did the Founding Fathers of the American constitution when they forbade federal and state governments to enact bills of attainder. But just as we have eroded old principles such as the right to silence, freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention without trial in recent years, our politicians can’t resist the temptation to go even further with these damaging new laws forbidding people to talk to each other.

It’s not as though we are hamstrung in our fight against organised crime. Crime Commissions and specific legislation give enormous powers to compel witnesses to answer questions, electronic monitoring is now a major weapon in the fight against crime and, let’s face it, the police have huge resources that easily make them the biggest gang on the block.

Some have said that even the devil deserves a trial. Well if he does, and the Nazis were given one at Nuremberg then, the bikers, who are neither devils nor Nazis, surely deserve a trial as well. It was refreshing to see the National Press Club agreeing to allow both bikers and one non-biker to say so forcibly why they object to these repugnant laws.

- Paul Wilson Is Chair of Criminology and a forensic psychologist at Bond University

Most commented

15 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • eag says:

      08:40am | 10/08/09

      Well last time I looked we still lived in a democracy.Long may it continue.

    • roflcopter says:

      09:45am | 10/08/09

      “They will drive biker groups underground, make them less able to be scrutinised by police forces”


      Bollocks. Crime will be fought fought the same way it’ always been. ‘Underground’, as in a way where no one can see what they’re doing?. Drug distribution is all about bulk product. You don’t sell off a tonne of cocaine by being overly sneaky. You sell it as fast as possible, which is what they’ve gotta do and will always do.

      As for gangs ‘being misunderstood’ or given a ‘bad name by a few bad seeds’; you’re dreaming.

      If all what the majority wanted was bike rides through the country side looking at cows and admiring waterfalls you would’ve seen the gangs break up LONG AGO…

      You join a gang with the reputation LIKE the Bandito’s, Gypsie Jokers, The Finks or whoever, KNOWING what you’re getting yourself into. I betcha 90% of gang members have had some sorta run in with the law.

    • Dave Munro says:

      10:50am | 10/08/09

      You know what, and I am getting sick of pointing this out (as are many others), there are no “bikie laws”. These laws can be applied, unfairly, to anyone the Attorney General and Police Commissioner of the day see fit to pick on.

      These laws are plain wrong. The SA and NSW governments, and the rest of them to follow, are picking on a very visible group of people. They think they are on a vote winner because so many people in this country believe everything that is written in the press and everything their leaders tell them. The rest of the population is just lucky that this group has the balls to stand up to the bullying and watering down of our rights. Don’t believe people are starting to question the motives of the Rann Labor government, have a surf through YouTube and see what the “fast car” people think of what is happening to them. It is not just the motorcycle lobby who thinks they are a bit fascist.

      Oh, by the way, I am not a “bikie”, I don’t even own a bike. I just have a bit of a thing about Freedom of Association and civil rights.

    • formersnag says:

      12:47pm | 10/08/09

      What they don’t tell you, is that organised crime, is also a big business on the other side of the fence as well.

      If the “war on drugs” was ended tomorrow. Drug use was decriminalised and addicts were given their drugs free. There would be thousands of police cruising the streets with nothing to do, because 2/3’s of all property crime, that’s theft, to us non criminologists, is drug related, or done to feed a drug habit. There would be magistrates sitting in empty court houses waiting for a trial to conduct.

      I am sure there are farmers out there capable of growing dope, coca trees, poppies, etc. But the downside would be mass unemployment in the criminal justice system, lawyers, etc, out of work and we can’t have that.

    • Shinsengumi says:

      12:47pm | 10/08/09

      I started my 2 wheel transport days riding a scooter (2004 Vespa).  I rode the Vespa for over a year until one day, I rode my mates’ motorcycle.  A 2007 GSXR 600.  I realised after riding his bike my scooters’ handling was woefully dangerous and unstable in comparison, and from that day I’ve never been able to trust my life to a scooter like I used to.

      Since the biker law blowup, I’ve had cops in both marked and unmarked cars tailgate me in city traffic, whilst I watch them laughing in my mirrors.  I know they want me to lane-split or break the speed limit; I hope one day they hit me so I can take them down - I am that angry.  My mate had his life threatened a month or two ago by an unmarked police car accelerating on him at well over the speed limit without any lights on, causing him to fear for his life and flee.  He subsequently lost his license when they sent him a ticket in the mail him for lane-splitting, negligent driving, and speeding.

      Infuriated, he sought legal advice, and his solicitor asked for the camera footage.  Because the Police never engaged the sirens, the camera never recorded, and there was no footage of their crime.

      So, not only do we motorcycle riders have to put up with all the existing dangers, we now face dangerously driving Police.  I crucially need my license for work so will not speed or lane split.  However, with the amount of unmarked police cars threatening us, we don’t have the freedom to flee when a genuine threat occurs as it could be undercover cops trying to entrap us!

    • stephen says:

      12:49pm | 10/08/09

      They tried the kiddy-teddy-chrissy-fun-run, and that didn’t work.
      Now they got an invite to address the intelligentsia(sic).

      They’re not as stupid as they look.

    • the real Media Mike... says:

      01:56pm | 10/08/09

      Firstly, thanks to the National Press club and to the speakers… Very little truth on this topic has been allowed to filter through to the public thanks to our Government and its brow beaten media… I cannot believe in this day and age that anyone can entertain the suggestion “some” Australians should not be entitled to the same basic human rights as others because the Government of the day is seeking to implement laws that “control” the entire population… Check your history books people, its been done before, many times… Pick what you believe to be a “soft” target for marginalisation, dehumanise that target then extinguish that target… Move onto the next target… Easy as… I just can’t believe its happening here in Australia… Anyone that agrees with this sort of legislation is not only certifiable but a traitor to all those who have and indeed, continue to fight and die in the name of freedom for All under the Australian flag… Completely, totally and utterly ashamed of this Government… FREE Australia in 2010…

    • pete davies says:

      02:14pm | 10/08/09

      Thanks Paul and to the other posters for standing against these fascist governments. By all means get the meth labs but leave the rest of us alone. Enough is enough.

    • Yolanda says:

      04:41pm | 10/08/09

      Instead of fighting the Govt, why dont bikers fight the criminal elements in their ranks?

    • Paul Kuhn of FREE Australia says:

      05:15pm | 10/08/09

      The Writ of Attainder was banned a long time ago and for good reason. It provides the assumption at law that the crown, the government, OWNS your goods and chattels to do with them as it pleases.  If you do not conform to whatever the current government demands of its citizen then it will remove your privilege to those goods and chattels under the legislation - not even thinly veiled, but that legislation is a Writ of Attainder.  In SA now the Rann government wants to crush cars of hoons. Firstly, define hoon. Ah, if you squeal your tyres, for ANY reason, for more than say 2-3 seconds, that qualifies. You exceed posted limits by more than 30kph, that qualifies and so on.  Here’s the rub. 2 drivers do the same thing except one owns a $500 bomb and the other owns a $40,000 car. They both get crushed. Consider the gross disparity of the penalty here given identical offences. I would go so far as to say this ridiculous law is illegal under many covenants.  Then getting tough on crime, being the excuse for bringing in harsh and draconian laws and marketed - yes, marketed - as anti-bikie laws.  How can any government introduce laws that target a minority group, whether you personally like them or not, say it is acting with proper governance? It isn’t and has committed an Act, quite literally, that means it is no longer fit to provide governance of the state and should be stood down by the Governor immediately. A government has a responsibility to act for ALL the people of the state, even down to ONE individual.  This failure alone means it is now acting beyond it’s authority, ultr-vires at law, and should be removed by Regal Perogative immediately.  Our Australian constitution says many things but it sometimes it is the things it doesn’t say directly that are in its wisdom. One thing that is implied is the collective understanding of preventing a tyrant or dictator attaining power. The Rann government in particular has reached the point where it could easily be is identified with just that proposition.  Hmm. Mugabe seizes land, oh, so does Rann under the new Criminal Confiscation Act replacing the PROCEEDS of Crime Act. The relevance here is that there is no longer any proof of an offence nor criminal conviction required for that seizure nor does it have to be the proceeds of crime, just reasonably suspected of being associated in some way with the commission of a crime! The government by decree - an Act of legislation - now dictates who you as an individual can associate with, who you can or cannot speak to. And there are plenty more examples. I said when the SOCCA (SA) Law came in that it wouldn’t stop there - and it hasn’t.

    • Geoff Griffin says:

      05:22pm | 10/08/09

      Right on the money Formersnag,  Drugs, Crime, Detection, Apprehension, Prosecution, Incarceration, Parole & Probation are part of a HUGE global industry imploying millions of Police, Judges, Clerks, Lawyers, Correctional Officers, Parole Boards and Officers and many others. What would happen if everybody SUDDENLY BEHAVED !........... Yep thats right massive unemployment…probably enough to affect the national economy ! so would any self interested Government really want to win the war on crime..of course they will say they do, but really ? These types of laws are great for this theory, they single out an unpopular minority that the authorities think aren’t well supported, ( that may prove to be a mistake on their part ) but of course they wont make any difference to crime statistics in the end but the average citizen will be impressed by the Governments tough stance and reward them with a few more years in power and no-ones out of work because of them.

    • Paul Kuhn of FREE Australia says:

      05:22pm | 10/08/09

      The Writ of Attainder was banned a long time ago and for good reason. It provides the assumption at law that the crown, the government, OWNS your goods and chattels to do with them as it pleases.  If you do not conform to whatever the current government demands of its citizen then it will remove your priveledge to those goods and chattels under the legislation - not even thinly veiled, but that legislation is a Writ of Attainder.  In SA now the Rann government wants to crush cars of hoons. Firstly, define hoon. Ah, if you squeal your tyres, for ANY reason, for more than say 2-3 seconds, that qulaifies. You exceed posted limits by more than 30kph, that qualifies and so on.  Here’s the rub. 2 drivers do the same thing except one owns a $500 bomb and the other owns a $40,000 car. They both get crushed. Consider the gross disparity of the penalty here given identical offences. I would go so far as to say this ridiculous law is illegal under, oh so many covenants.  Then getting tough on crime, being the excuse for bringing in harsh and draconian laws and marketed - yes, marketed - as anti-bikie laws.  How can any government introduce laws that target a minority group, whether you personally like them or not, say it is acting with proper governance? It isn’t and has committed an Act, quite literally, that means it is no longer fit to provide governance of the state and should be stood down by the Governor immediately. A government has a responsibility to act for ALL the people of the state, even down to ONE individual.  This failure alone means it is now acting beyond it’s authority, ultr-vires at law, and should be removed by Regal Perogative immediately.  Our Australian constitution says many things but it sometimes it is the things it doesn’t say directly that are in its wisdom. One thing that is implied is the collective understanding of preventing a tyrant or dictator attaining power. The Rann government in particular has reached the point where it could easily be is identified with just that proposition.  Hmm. Mugabe seizes land, oh, so does Rann under the new Criminal Confiscation Act replacing the PROCEEDS of Crime Act. The relevence here is that there is no longer any proof of an offence nor criminal conviction required for that seizure nor does it have to be the proceeds of crime, just reasonably suspected of being associated in some way with the commission of a crime! The government by decree - an Act of legislation - now dictates who you as an individual can associate with, who you can or cannot speak to. And there are plenty more examples. I said when the SOCCA (SA) Law came in that it wouldn’t stop there - and it hasn’t.

    • watcher says:

      05:31pm | 10/08/09

      Love to see Mike ‘Lance’ Ranns response to the above article.
      Oops ... suppose he’s too busy Twittering ....
      Better still - Get Rann and Ferret together to debate the laws - Wouldn’t that be magic television.
      I know which one wouldn’t front ...

    • Terry Wright says:

      06:32pm | 10/08/09

      Crime fighting laws made in haste for political point scoring always miss the real problem and achieve bugger all. All that really happens is that we loose more of our rights and anonymity whilst that political vote winner called “Tough on Crime” (aka “Tough on Drugs”) is dragged out at each media opportunity.

      If they were really serious about fighting organised crime especially the Bikers, the government would target their main source of income by repealing drug prohibition.  The Association law is just another useless strategy to add to the ever growing pile of failed attempts at tackling the drug problem via a “War on Drugs” mentality.

      You may have noticed that politicians and senior police will use extreme measures to fight drugs and crime but then go absolutely batshit when someone suggests the obvious solution of removing prohibition. The only group who fully support the same, tired old strategies are those who get the most out of them ... organised crime.

    • T.K.Barnes says:

      08:11pm | 10/08/09

      I live in South Australia and back in June I was pulled over bay an unmarked police vehicle some 300 meters from home. I had just gone down from home to fuel up and on leaving the servo all hell broke loose sirens and lights blazing. I pulled over and the Police Officer approched saying: “You have done nothing wrong Sir, this is just a licence check”. I replied: “No it is not you have pulled me over just because I am riding A Harley”. He said ” That’s right”. He then went on to tell me he was a member of the “Anti Bikie squad”. Here I was wearing a white helmet and dressed in blue jeans and a blue shirt. Next he continued with the following “I can tell by that exhaust that it is too loud”. “Your headlight is illegal”. I stated that I had not made exessive noise and the headlight had the Australian DOT on it. I continued to say that I was a member of the Harley Owners Group and we (in SA) had been assured by the Premier and the Attourney General that we would not be harassed by you (the Police). I wished that I had a witness (I would have him for assult) as he then thrusted my license into my ribs and told me to “F OFF”. I am 61 years old and I now know why the younger generation holds no respect for the law.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter