Lost in the announcement of new software to link ASIO with the Immigration Department and an elevated terror threat for Indonesia are some curious comments by Federal Police Commissioner Mick Keelty. On Thursday Keelty expressed concern regarding sharing information between the Federal police and other Australian law enforcement agencies:
Mr Keelty said information gleaned during some AFP investigations could not be shared with other police forces and agencies, and the database could create privacy and national security concerns
Keelty was referring to access to a database by a NSW police officer. Claims that the access was unauthorised have been met with anger from NSW.
But Mr Keelty’s comments have been furiously disputed by NSW police, who say the officer had full clearance from the federal police to access information.
A police source confirmed the dispute was “far from being an isolated incident”.
He said: “We’re all in a war zone. There’s a lot of pressure on police around the country at this time. The AFP is in that melting pot, and at times it’s causing a of lot of tension between jurisdictions.”
This internecine dispute doesn’t bode well for Australian counter-terrorism.
The American intelligence community is aware that sharing information between intelligence agencies is vital for effective counter-terrorism. They had to learn the hard way.
While it makes sense for the Australian Federal Police to head up the law enforcement approach to counter-terrorism, Keelty’s comments indicate a near feudal approach to the issue. Information should not be regarded as currency for favours. In the middle of a major operation spanning multiple states in regards to the recent attempted attacks in the UK, Keelty has thrown a bomb into attempts for effective cooperation between the states and federal agencies.
As Australia’s top cop, Keelty should be promoting cooperation rather than fostering internal disputes between Australia’s law enforcement agencies.
Given that the people who have the most claim to preventing the recent London/Glasgow fumbles from turning into a bloodbath appear to be; normal parking officers and by-laws officers of local government, normal old airport security guys and airport cleaners to supply a good Glasgow toe tap or kickin’ – it seems to me that co-operation with lesser beings in the enforcement and public service world might well be a good idea to protect us.
I have however admired Keelty’s repeated statements to the hysterical MSM that nobody detained in Australia has necessarily committed any offences and they may well end up being released without any further action.
Those statements, combined with Laughing Phil’s sepulchral foreshadowing of further ‘tightening’ of anti-terrorism laws, demonstrate how passively Australians have watched governments introduce unprecedented police powers under the excuse of the GWOT. I wonder what would have happened if police had simply asked the Brisbane doctors quietly to co-operate in their investigations without plastering their names and photos across the globe. But that of course would have frustrated the true purpose of the anti-terror laws.
These sorts of things are fairly inevitable, unfortunately. Turf battles happen with large bureaucracies. The American “homeland security department” and later overall director of intelligence experiments haven’t been total successes, but it certainly is worth trying to minimise any problems of coordination.
To be fair, one of them was about to leave Australia, travelling on a one-way ticket.
He he given notice at his place of employment, I wonder?
I think that, all in all, when anyone falls into the belly of the counter-terrorism beast, the more publicity concerning their conditions of detainment, the better.
Shaun Cronin:
Good topic.
This is an intelligence paradox as old as history. Do you share your information with everyone on your side and risk warning traitors and the enemy of what you really do know and what your intentions are? OR Do you guard every scrap of information as though it was precious jewellry and so deprive your fellows of vital information that would defeat the enemy or, worse yet, stop them preventing your own defeat.
My own preference is for the widest distribution of routine intelligence on a Need-To-Know basis. [I won't discuss specific methods here but would consider all wealth-generating consultancy offers
].
Given Keelty’s undoubted experience and talents, I’m surprised that this issue has erupted. Oh well, nobody’s perfect, I suppose.
Ken Lovell:
Yes. I heard what Ruddock said … and was horrified. I hope all undergraduate Law students heard it too – an excellent example of what you must never never never do.
No. He had applied for and been granted leave to visit his wife, who had just had a baby in India (no doubt planned in advance to mask the real reason for the flight). He says it was a one way ticket because the family was returning together and he intended to arrange tickets once he got to India. HA! What a ridiculous yarn, for reasons which I can’t think of right now.
And of course the more publicity the better it suits the government – that’s what I meant by ‘the true purpose of the anti-terror laws’. Scared voters vote conservative.
The doctor applied for, and was granted leave.
The American “homeland security departmentâ€? and later overall director of intelligence experiments haven’t been total successes, but it certainly is worth trying to minimise any problems of coordination…… said Mark.
Interesting comment in view of Labors’ continued support of such a department, unless I missed the change.
I found it most strange, that they endorsed such a plan, let alone the use of this pilfered terminolgy. For some reason when, I heard “homeland” from the mouths of the ‘gang of Bush’, I thought new word for “fatherland”. Maybe it can be rebranded as ‘Homeland OZ, ‘true blue’ Department’ by Singo.
Keelty has very good reason to not allow state police forces access to any , but limited, databases. Their form in the area , certainly in Victoria, is truly dreadful.
I wasn’t aware of the circumstances of his employment.
If it is clear that he has been subject to heavy-handed treatment, then that is likely to redound to the disfavour of the authorities.
I am unaware that these events have decreased the disfavour in which the coalition are currently suffering in the eyes of the electorate.
Maximum publicity of an injustice is more likely to hurt a government whose motives and methods are already suspect.
Sheesh Katz, with so much unawareness, it sounds like you could land a pretty good job working for the intelligence agencies yourself!
Ken, given Howard’s escalating fear-mongering, by the time the election is held most of the Australian population won’t vote because they’ll be hiding under their bed with a loaded gun.
It works in America and it will continue to work here.
Over at RTS I predicted a war on cane toads as the next Ratty ploy, and by gum, I’m sticking to it.
Mr Howard’s comments came as the Australian Federal Police prepared to charge or release Dr Mohammed Haneef, the man arrested in Queensland last Monday in relation to failed attempts to bomb London and Glasgow.
Dog, Meet Whistle.
Perhaps the NSW guy just didn’t have clearance? Mix ups can happen in anything…
Rules about who is allowed to view what are pretty important in this matter… So I don’t think Kelty’s comments are necessarily “feudal”.
Perhaps there aren’t any systemic problems?
Rules are important but one of the linked articles states that the officer did have the required clearance.
Keelty’s remarks are well, old fashioned. A secured database (as no-one is suggesting the information be free for all) to allow different agencies to share information would assist counterterrorism. Lack of information sharing between agencies was identified by the 911 Commission as a major problem in combating terrorism.
I would far prefer to see that the police were kept, on the job, where most of the killing is happening. In 2006 we lost 1601 of our citizens and many more injured.
Time to get serious and bring on….. The War Against Cars. On this, any P.M. would have my full support. People are actually being killed in droves.
Shaun,
Perhaps I’m wrong – but I think what the newspapers said was that NSW Police said he had clearance…. which may or may not be different from him *actually* having clearance. I guess the AFP’s rules trump…
Shaun:
Last night’s ABC “4 Corners” was interesting ….. all that work …. all that success ….. and yet two persons observed four times acting on the periphery then went on to bomb the London Ungerground several weeks later. Such a pity nobody shared information with and sought opinions and recent information from the coppers at the local station ……
Thanks Graham. I missed Four Corners but will catch the repeat.
The thing is that the federal law enforcement agencies should take over some of powers of the state/local agencies to resolve jurisdictional issues. However that does not mean dismissing the any input or information from a state or local level nor making the information only flow in one direction.
David, the concern is that if the AFP rules trump those with proper access, that is not a good way to handle information nor promote cooperation. With proper documentation and access control, the AFP should know how has access and so should other agencies.
Shaun:
Slightly off-topic but ….. I am very annoyed at the delays in dealing with a doctor from the Gold Coast currently being held without charge.
IF [a big IF] the delays are because of having to go through 31 000 [or whatever] files on a computer, you don’t need 31 000 intelligence analysts and i.t. specialists to go through them!! The whole thing could have been done by a couple of schools of Grade 8 students [or some such group] to do all the mundane stuff …. under the supervision of several linguists, analysts, i.t. wallahs and other assorted experts …. with useable results available within hours, not months.
Absurd? Not really. When Khomeini’s favourite students took American diplomats and others prisoner in Tehran, they were confronted with mountains of shredded documents. Lacking forensic experts to tell them their task was impossible, they just started sorting out the jumbled mass and sticking bits together until they reassembled some documents that were very interesting – all without a computer – and all with patience, persistence and a lot of willing unskilled hands.
What did the Iranian students have that we Australians lack?
Time, apparently. It took them years to assemble those documents from the shredded, and often double shredded material they had to work with.
There are several linguists available on call who can read Hindi, Urdu and Mizo, the language of Karnataka, from which the good doctor is said to come and in which languages it is reasonable to expect some of his correspondence would be written? Who’d have thought.
Also I’d have some reservations about using Grade 8 students for any form of data sifting/analysis. Their efforts would contribute to the chain of evidence that a prosecution would later rely upon and therefore would be subject to cross-examination. I really don’t think that many Grade 8ers would bear up too well under vigorous cross-examination.
31,000 files is doesn’t really describe what the files are. Do they mean 31,000 text files, images etc or has someone included system files as well? I wager that the computer forensic team have some pretty nifty tools so I do not see this being a delay at all unless they need to translate documents.
Amen Shaun. I would assume they’d be looking for a very few things to keep Haneef detained:
1. evidence of contact with the other doctors in the plot, for instance, emails, phone numbers, etc.
2. evidence of details of the plot in any of the documents on the laptop
3. evidence of any other plotting—such as receipts or invoices for bomb-making materials, handbooks, pro-terrorist apologia, etc.
Fuck me, a child can do most of that detection with the search function in Windows XP. You don’t need to translate mobile phone numbers or email addresses if you *already know what you’re looking for*. If they know what volume of material there is, there’s obviously no password on his computer. What’s the problem?
GregM:
No wonder the terrorists are winning so far. We can’t upset our precious legal eagels and tweak the vanity of our intelligence experts, can we? Knock, knock. there seems to be a bit of a war going on, or so I hear, and at the sound of the next bang it will be 13 o’clock ……
Yes, that was a rhetorical question of mine …. but I did say “all without a computer” ….. however, we have computers aplenty with sophisticated graphics programs. As for the apparent language problem, we now have a wide choice of automatic translation programs – all of which a Grade 8er or mentally-alert pensioner can learn within 2 days [linguist need be involved only for tidying-up or for vitally important items]. True, the Iranian students had Time …. but they also had something we seem to lack: THE WILL TO WIN!!!!!!
Fuck’s sakes, ding-a-ling Bell. It’s not a matter of professional egotism to want to protect people from terrorist attack while simultaneously not allowing indefinite internment of suspects. GregM’s right: that kind of piecing-together takes years. Read the last half of Anna Funder’s Stasiland about the ‘Puzzle Women’ putting together Staatssicherheitdienst files in Nuremberg, and get an idea of how long it takes to do proper content analysis of destroyed documents—which I most definitely point out, this fella’s lappie is not.
Do you believe in the legal system or not?
FdaG:
Well. what the hell else is it?
Are you sure they aren’t a little too relaxed & comfortable?
Collecting substantial evidence and producing consistently reliable intelligence usually does take excellent teamwork, comprehensive record-keeping and cross-checking, diligent and patient work – sometimes over decades – by highly skilled personnel. Patence, patience, patience.
But sometimes – very rarely – you must get the lead out of your backside and move like greased lightning. That means working around the clock with whoever you can grab to get the job done and done properly. Failing to rapidly concentrate the fullest possible effort can get good people killed.
Here we have a person who may have been associated in some way with those involved in a failed terrorist operation and who was perceived to been doing something that aroused suspicion [supposedly attempting to flee the country]. It is bad enough that so many of our traditional rights and duties have been abolished by the “anti-terrorism” laws that the man has been detained without charge [and, unlike our allies, thankfully without torture!!] but that once detained, the authorities seem to be just dawdling along.
Speed was essential.
If he was innocent then his liberty should have been restored as quickly as possible.
If he was indeed connected with acts of terrorism then delays could well put a lot more innocent people at grave risk of injury and death.
Speed, thoroughness and fairness are not mutually exclusive.