Rocco Perrotta: SA’s anti-bikie laws are a bad copy of Queensland’s

HERE’S what’s wrong with the SA Government’s “bikie laws” Bill recently introduced into Parliament - Sally Kuether, a library assistant and mother-of-three.

QLD_CM_NEWS_SALLYKEUTHER_31JAN14

SALLY Kuether represents much of what is wrong with the SA Government’s “bikie laws” Bill recently introduced into Parliament.

Last year Sally was charged with participating in a criminal organisation and wearing club colours in a licensed premises under Queensland’s tough (read that as “unjust”) bikie laws.

Sally was a respected library assistant and mother of three who led a blameless life. She was the recipient of a Lord Mayor’s Award for excellence beyond the call of duty for her volunteer work during Brisbane’s floods of 2011.

Tellingly, she was not even a member of a club. In short, this was a disaster for the then Premier Campbell Newman’s “tough on bikies” laws.

The tide was soon to turn against Newman’s government after Queenslanders woke up to the real prospect that an innocent woman would spend a minimum six months in prison for wearing the wrong clothes and being in the presence of two people, one of whom was her partner, who were “associated” with a “declared” motorcycle club.

That they did not attempt to commit a crime was irrelevant. The public were outraged that this could happen after the laws were sold to them on the basis they were necessary for public safety. Ultimately, common sense prevailed and all charges were dropped.

Queensland’s bikie laws have not since proven to be effective. Yet, SA is attempting to head down the same path. Our Government also says it is necessary for public safety.

It therefore copied Queensland’s bikie laws after they withstood a High Court challenge. Valid or not, the laws do not erase a number of concerns.

The threshold concern is that we are copying unpopular Queensland laws that don’t seem to work. An inquiry into how to fight organised crime may be more beneficial than to copy draconian laws that imprison people because of what they wear and who they have a coffee with.

Particularly controversial is the fact that the Bill empowers Parliament to declare “criminal organisations”. This is an extraordinary development because it means Parliament is doing the job of the court, but does not act like a court.

Parliament doesn’t hear evidence like a court would, make decisions like a court does, is not open and transparent like a court and, critically, is not open to review by a higher authority like a court must be.

The consequences of being declared a criminal organisation are serious. It will lead to mandatory imprisonment for people who attend certain places or events, wear certain clothes or jewellery or are in the company of certain people.

As with Sally Kuether, the reality, if not inevitability, is that many such people will not have any involvement in criminal activity.

Any reform to disband “criminal” organisations should replicate the existing model of requiring the court to make the declaration upon proof the organisation was truly criminal and that people genuinely associated with it are a real risk of committing serious crimes. The SA Bill does not do that.

Rocco Perrotta is the president of the SA Law Society.