Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

WA QLD Style Bikie Laws For WA

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' at netrider.net.au started by middo, Feb 11, 2015.

  1. From https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/wa/a/26258107/tough-new-bikie-laws-for-wa/

    and on the front page of The West Australian

    Tough new bikie laws for WA

    Exclusive Grant Taylor
    February 11, 2015, 2:45 am

    Target: Rebels bikies say the laws will be used against them. Picture: Michael O'Brien/The West Australian

    WA's much-hyped anti-bikie laws could be radically overhauled or replaced with even tougher legislation designed to make it easier for police to put criminal gangs out of business.

    Attorney-General Michael Mischin has confirmed he is reviewing Queensland's controversial bikie laws - regarded as the toughest in the country - to see whether any "worthwhile amendments" could be made to WA's legislation.

    The WA laws are yet to be used almost 18 months after they were introduced.

    The Queensland laws give its Parliament the power to ban gangs and prevent members from associating with each other. A total of 26 gangs were outlawed within two weeks of the laws being introduced.

    But in WA, police must apply to the Supreme Court for a hearing where a judge determines if there is sufficient evidence for a gang to be declared a criminal organisation.

    If successful, police must then go back to court to apply for so-called "control orders" against individual members to restrict whom they can associate with.

    It is understood WA Police were close to lodging their first application, but that is now likely to be put on hold while the State Government decides whether it will change the law.

    Rebels State president Nick Martin previously said he believed his gang would be the first targeted.

    The club's lawyer Michael Tudori said yesterday though he was no fan of the existing WA laws, members at least had a chance to fight applications in court.

    He said the Queensland laws took that right away by enabling Parliament to outlaw gangs with "the stroke of a pen".

    "Ultimately you would have politicians making decisions without any scrutiny at all," Mr Tudori said.

    WA shadow attorney-general John Quigley accused the Government yesterday of allowing bikie gangs to flourish under its watch and said the suggestion of more delays was unacceptable.

    "The Barnett Government has had five years to fix the bikie problem but has totally failed to protect the community against their spread," he said.

    The Queensland legislation includes mandatory jail terms of between 15 and 25 years for bikies who commit serious crimes such as assaults or rapes.

    The heavy sentences are on top of any normal penalty that would have been imposed by the courts and can only be reduced if gang members agree to inform on their colleagues.

    It is not known if the State Government is interested in that aspect of the Queensland laws.

    South Australia has also been reviewing the Queensland legislation and is considering modifying its laws to give its Parliament, rather than the courts, the power to ban gangs.

    The flood of interest in the Queensland legislation comes after a recent High Court decision that rejected a case mounted by the Hells Angels.

    They argued the powers were unconstitutional and breached basic human rights.

    Mr Tudori said the State Government could expect further legal challenges regardless of what shape WA's laws ultimately took.
  2. Well I for one think that it is most unreasonable for legal processes to require such outdated things as so-called "evidence" or targetted sanctions against individuals rather than groups. Given the manifest incompetence of WAPOL (ref: quite a lot of high profile cases falling in a heap, often due to truly staggering breaches of basic procedure), it is clearly grossly unfair to expect them to apply good policing and investigative practices.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  3. Evidence is wot we make up guv!

    Victoria has similar laws to WA's and a similar court imposed check and balance regarding the declaration of a "criminal gang", however the libs watered it down from "beyond reasonable doubt" to "balance of probabilities" - so now the Police work can be "looser". And I believe it's all incamera to, so there's denial of natural justice too. It's pretty rotten IMHO.

    Given that there are yakuza, international and local drug rings, street gangs, mafia, "underbelly" type groups and organisations around that actually do solely exist for the purposes of organised crime, it staggers me that the authorities want to focus on 1% clubs who probably have some crime elements in them, but who arguably do not exist for the sole purposes of crime.

    Why not go after the genuine hard core proper criminal organisations?
  4. Because the 1%er's are visible. The average person may have an idea of the others but it's out of sight, out of mind.
    A tatted up bikie with a patch on a loud as fcuk HD stands out.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  5. Why? You already know why, but for those who don't it's because 'bikies' are highly visible which makes it easy for the authorities to demonise them and therefore they (the authorities) can be seen to be doing something. It's not so easy to paint a group of business men as being the bad guy because well they look like business men.
    • Agree Agree x 4
  6. Home you go bro

    Joel Royston Makaea.

    A senior Rebels bikie has become the first person in WA to be hit with a deportation order solely because they are a member of an outlaw motorcycle gang.

    New Zealand-born Joel Royston Makaea, 34, was arrested and taken into immigration detention in Perth on Monday after the Immigration Minister revoked his visa on “character” grounds.

    Under changes to the Migration Act introduced in December, the minister has the power to cancel the visa of anyone involved in an organisation or gang that was reasonably suspected of being involved in criminal activity.

    The person targeted for deportation does not have to be convicted of a serious offence, or even charged with one.

    Mr Makaea, who is believed to be a father of six, is the sergeant-at-arms of the Rebels’ Bentley-based chapter and has lived in Perth since March 2005.

    It is understood he has only a limited criminal history during his time in Australia, with his most recent charges relating to disorderly conduct and driving under the influence of drugs.

    But his fellow Rebels gang members do have form, including the current and former presidents of the Bentley chapter, who are both awaiting trial on drug trafficking charges.

    Immigration and Border Protection Minister Peter Dutton would not comment on the specifics of Mr Makaea’s case yesterday. He made no apologies for the hard line taken by his Government, saying the involvement of bikies in serious and organised crime was well documented and community safety had to come first.

    “Criminal bikie groups sell and distribute ice and are involved in other serious crime,” he said.

    “On that basis, through a provision within the Migration Act, I can decide that their visas will be cancelled and they will be going back to their country of birth.

    “Coming to Australia and remaining here on a visa is a privilege — not a right. If that privilege is abused, then they should expect to have their visa cancelled and be sent packing from our country.”

    Mr Makaea does have the right to appeal against the decision but would need to demonstrate that he was not a person of bad character.

    Link: WA bikie faces deportation

  7. I read this today at lunchtime. It makes me wonder what happens if he had gained Australian Citizenship, as so many foreign workers at my school have done. Could he be deported then? I would assume not. Watch the imported bikies suddenly become dual nationals.

    Also interesting that his history in WA was pretty mild. He hadn't committed violent crimes or been caught trafficking. Should he have been deported? I think we are cracking a nut with a sledge hammer here.
  8. Correct.

    But the Q is: Could he have gained citizenship?

    There are reasons they do not become citizens.

    Applicants need to demonstrate that they are of good character. In order for a person to prove that they are of good character., a penal clearance certificate is required if the applicant has spent a significant amount of time overseas, while also still holding a permanent resident visa. All applicants must disclose any findings of guilt which has resulted in either a term of imprisonment, a good behaviour bond, or a fine as modes of punishment (excluding parking & speeding fines).

    The Migration Act 1958 already deems them to be of poor character.

    Sect 5C - Meaning of character concern
    (1) For the purposes of this Act, a non-citizen is of character concern if:
    (a) the non-citizen has a substantial criminal record (as defined by subsection (2)); or
    (b) the non-citizen has or has had an association with someone else, or with a group or organisation, who is reasonably suspected of having been or being involved in criminal conduct

    Whether a person has committed violent crimes or not has not been a consideration for nearly 20 years now. You can still be deported for criminal association or being a threat to national security ie. failing the 'character test'.

    • Informative Informative x 1