A critical legal loophole in Western Australia's counter-terrorism framework could force police to release individuals suspected of planning terrorist acts after just 14 days, with the Cook Government refusing to step in and fix the law.
The Legislative Gap in Preventative Detention
The issue centres on the state's Terrorism (Preventative Detention) Act 2006. This legislation currently allows WA Police to detain a person for a maximum of 14 days if they reasonably suspect a terrorist act is being planned and the detention would substantially help in preventing it. However, the law lacks a provision for a 'continuing preventative detention order' (CPDO).
This type of order, which exists in Commonwealth legislation and in the laws of other states like New South Wales, permits authorities to apply to keep a high-risk individual in custody beyond the initial 14-day period. Without it, WA Police face a stark choice: either release the suspect after two weeks or charge them with a crime, potentially before an investigation is complete.
WA Police Commissioner Col Blanch has publicly expressed his concern, stating the force is "very worried" about the gap. He confirmed that police have been forced to release individuals under this act in the past, though he did not specify how many times this has occurred.
Government's Stance: A Federal Responsibility
Despite the clear warning from the state's top police officer, the Cook Government has indicated it will not move to amend the law. A government spokesperson placed the responsibility squarely on the federal level, arguing that terrorism is primarily a Commonwealth matter.
The spokesperson stated, "The Cook Government expects the Commonwealth to ensure its laws are adequate to deal with terrorist threats". They further suggested that if the Commonwealth's independent reviewer of terrorism laws identifies a need for reform, the federal government should act to close the loophole nationally.
This position creates a potential standoff, leaving a known vulnerability in the state's security apparatus unaddressed. The refusal to act means WA remains the only state or territory without a mechanism for extended preventative detention under its own laws, relying entirely on federal provisions which may not always align with local operational needs.
Implications for National Security and Community Safety
The persistence of this loophole has significant implications. It creates a potential weak link in Australia's national counter-terrorism strategy, where a person considered too dangerous to release in one jurisdiction could be freed in WA due to legislative limitations.
Security experts warn that such gaps can be exploited. The situation raises urgent questions about the coordination between state and federal governments on critical security matters. While the Commonwealth has robust laws, effective on-the-ground policing and immediate threat management often fall to state authorities, who in this case feel their hands are tied by an outdated statute.
The debate highlights the complex interplay between state and federal jurisdictions in managing terrorism threats. With the police commissioner sounding the alarm and the state government deferring to Canberra, the safety of West Australians may hinge on which level of government decides to take ownership of the problem first.
