Former terror accused Zainab Abdirahman-Khalif should not be allowed to drive a well-fuelled car, government lawyer argues
A former terrorism suspect cleared on appeal of joining Islamic State is fighting attempts to ban her from approaching an airport or driving a car containing more than four litres of petrol.
Police & Courts
Don't miss out on the headlines from Police & Courts. Followed categories will be added to My News.
A former terrorism suspect should be banned from going within 1km of an airport or driving a car with more than four litres of petrol to prevent her fleeing the state or country, a court has heard.
Despite having her conviction for being part of a terrorist organisation overturned, the Federal Government maintains that Zainab Abdirahman-Khalif remains a threat to the community because of her notoriety and susceptibility to being influenced.
The 25-year-old was found guilty of being a member of terrorist organisation Islamic State, but had the conviction overturned on appeal to the Supreme Court.
Despite her being released back into the community, the Federal Government sought a control order which would restrict the former nursing student’s movements and communications.
A High Court appeal has also been lodged against the decision to overturn her conviction by the SA Supreme Court.
Ms Abdirahman-Khalif contested the order and has become the first person to go before the Federal Court contesting all proposed control measures.
In November last year, Justice Natalie Charlesworth granted an interim control order ahead of a three-day hearing which began on Tuesday.
During the hearing, Justice Charlesworth heard the Federal Government wanted a series of measures to control Ms Abdirahman-Khalif’s movements.
These included being banned from being within one kilometre of an airport or being behind the wheel of a car with more than four litres of petrol.
She would also have to report to police, be subject to a curfew and be banned from using encrypted communications apps.
Justice Charlesworth said some of the controls proposed by the government, particularly the curfew, were akin to a “create your own offence regime”.
“If a certain person does something which would otherwise be quite lawful it becomes unlawful to do it,” she said.
“We need to ask what is the risk and what is it about nighttime which might exacerbate the risk more than daytime?”
Andrew Berger, for the Federal Government, said Ms Abdirahman-Khalif remained a risk to the community because she was a target for other extremists who had followed her highly publicised trial.
Mr Berger argued that Ms Abdirahman-Khalif had already been approached by members of the Clavell family, several of whom are alleged to have extremist beliefs, and had accepted money from them.
“We are saying that the Clavells did not seek her out because they are nice people who simply wanted to help a fellow citizen,” Mr Berger said.
“Rather they sought her out because of her notoriety as someone who had been charged with trying to become a member of Islamic State.
“We say this contact is a stark illustration of the possibility that those who hold extremist views could seek her out. That is a risk even if she does nothing to encourage it.”
The hearing continues on Wednesday.