Police listened to phone call between lawyer and client after raid | Australia news | The GuardianPolice listened to phone call between lawyer and client after raid | Australia news | The Guardian










Close






Skip to main content

 









sign in








subscribe









search




jobs






more


from the guardian:


jobs


change edition:



switch to the UK edition


switch to the AU edition







US edition




switch to the UK edition




switch to the Australia edition













The Guardian


Winner of the Pulitzer prize











home


›
world


›
australia




UK


europe


americas


asia


middle east


africa










home




US




world
selected




opinion




sports




soccer




tech




arts




lifestyle




fashion




business




money




travel




environment







browse all sections
close







 











Australian security and counter-terrorism



Police listened to lawyer-client phone call after Sydney counter-terrorism raid









Lawyer of arrested man – who was later released without charge – did not know police were listening under the terms of preventative detention order

















In September, police raided numerous homes across New South Wales, involving more than 800 officers. Photograph: AAP/NSW Police




Paul Farrell






@FarrellPF





Sunday 23 November 2014 23.11 EST







Share on Facebook







Share on Twitter







Share via Email







Share on LinkedIn







Share on Google+







Share on WhatsApp
















Police officers covertly listened to a phone call between a lawyer and a client who had been detained without charge under a preventative detention order (PDO) during September’s counter-terrorism raids in Sydney. 
Surveillance of calls is mandatory under the PDO legislation, but the orders had never previously been used since their introduction in 2005, and there is no mechanism for lawyers to be alerted to the fact that clients have been placed on a PDO. 
Legal critics have described the covert surveillance as a serious breach of the client’s legal rights.
In September, police raided numerous homes across New South Wales, involving more than 800 officers. Fifteen people were detained amid media reports that the raids had “thwarted a beheading plot”, although no evidence to support this has been publicly revealed. Eventually, one man was charged with a terrorism offence.
The raids were the first time PDOs had been used anywhere in Australia. They allow people to be detained for up to two weeks without charge. Three men were placed on the orders during the raids, but were later released without charge.
Guardian Australia can now reveal what happened to the three men when the orders were issued, although their identities cannot be reported because of a broad suppression order.
Nick Hanna, who represented one of the men when the orders were issued, told Guardian Australia the men were taken to a police station in Surry Hills, where they were held in a separate part of the building from other detainees.
Hanna had a phone conversation with one of the men shortly after he was detained. But when he spoke to his client a second time later that day, he learnt that the first phone conversation had been monitored by police.
In normal circumstances it is highly unusual for lawyers’ communications with their clients to be monitored by police because the confidentiality of the relationship is considered vital to protect the legal rights of a person accused of a crime.
“I called and I had a conversation with my client,” Hanna said. “I then called back about half an hour later and an officer said, ‘By the way, we’re listening to your conversations, we’re monitoring them live and you’re not allowed to speak in any language other than English.’
“I was only told the second time. I hadn’t dealt with this before because they had been so sparingly used, so that was disconcerting.”
Under NSW terrorism laws, all communications from people while they are held under PDOs must be monitored. Any information gained by police from these phone calls cannot be used as evidence against the man.
“The fact that it’s not admissible in proceedings does little to allay our concerns, because there are fundamental reasons for having legal professional privilege that extends far beyond what can be admitted in court, and this really undermines that,” Hanna said.
“At the very least they should be required to notify the lawyer and client that their communications are going to be monitored.”
Hanna said the police had still refused to provide reasons for holding his client, who has not been charged.
“Shortly after he was released we put in a formal request for the reasons to be provided for us,” he said. “All we were ever told is that it is terrorism-related, yet nothing’s been produced. We’re not aware of anything adverse being found from when his house was searched.”
Hanna said his client had sustained injuries when he was detained, and he was considering whether to take action against the police.
Guardian Australia is unable to identify Hanna’s client because of a broad and indefinite suppression order issued by a NSW supreme court judge. 
NSW Police sought and were granted 36-hour PDOs by the court the night before the raids. The order said the name of the parties, the evidence and the judgement could not be published. It is still in force and appears to apply indefinitely.
PDOs were introduced by Commonwealth and state governments after the 2005 London bombing, and were designed as a response to an imminent terrorist attack. However, the federal government’s former national security legislation monitor has described them as an “unnecessary” addition to existing police powers.
The PDO regime is so restrictive that the Australian Federal Police even refused to initially confirm how many people were being held shortly after the raids.
Hanna’s account of the use of the law has raised concerns with legal experts. Australian Lawyers Alliance spokesman Greg Barns said it was a serious breach of the client’s legal rights.
“It’s outrageous that security and police agencies are listening in on the conversation between clients and their lawyers,” he said. “It breaches a fundamental human right which is the right between a lawyer and their client, and it’s a breach of the rules relating to legal professional privilege.” 
Guardian Australia put detailed questions about the circumstances of the use of the PDOs to NSW police. A spokesman said in a statement: “It is inappropriate for NSW police to comment.”
PDOs can be issued under NSW or Commonwealth laws. Laws allowing the federal police to seek the orders were due to expire in 2016, but have been extended by parliament as part of its second tranche of national security legislation.
Omarjan Azari, the only person charged with a terrorism offence following the raids, appeared in court in November. His lawyer told the court there had been a “glaring error” in the translation of an intercepted phone call at the centre of the case.



Topics



Australian security and counter-terrorism




New South Wales




Sydney




Australian police and policing








Share on Facebook







Share on Twitter







Share via Email







Share on LinkedIn







Share on Google+







Share on WhatsApp


























View all comments >







comments 
Sign in
or create your Guardian account to join the discussion.

This discussion is closed for comments.

We’re doing some maintenance right now. You can still read comments, but please come back later to add your own.


Commenting has been disabled for this account (why?)







Order by 


newest


oldest




Show 25


25


50


100




Threads 


collapsed


expanded


unthreaded





Loading comments… Trouble loading?




View more comments







 






related content













popular












 








The Guardian






back to top














home




US




world
selected




opinion




sports




soccer




tech




arts




lifestyle




fashion




business




money




travel




environment







all sections
close







home




US




world
selected




UK




europe




americas




asia




middle east




africa




australia
selected






opinion




sports




soccer




MLS




NFL




MLB




NBA




NHL






soccer




live scores




tables




competitions




results




fixtures




clubs






tech




games






arts




movies




tv & radio




music




books




art & design




stage




classical






lifestyle




food




health




love & sex




family




women




home & garden






fashion




business




markets




companies






money




travel




USA




europe




UK






environment




development




cities






science




media




crosswords




video











World




›
Australia




›
Australian security and counter-terrorism








jobs

subscribe
all topics
all contributors

info and resources

contact us

feedback

complaints & corrections
terms & conditions
privacy policy
cookie policy
securedrop


© 2015 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.






















 
