The University of Sydney Law School has published an open letter expressing serious concerns about the new Campus Access Policy 2024, which was introduced earlier this year as a replacement for the Campus Access Rule 2009.

The letter, signed by 54 academics to date, is addressed to Chancellor David Thodey, Vice-Chancellor Mark Scott, and the Academic Board. It highlights deep reservations about the policy's introduction process, its substance, the broader message it conveys, and the limited timeframe for its review.

The University formally rescinded the previous Campus Access Rule in July and replaced it with the 2024 version, a move that has sparked protests from student activists and drawn considerable criticism from the NSW Council for Civil Liberties.

Legal experts are calling for sanctions against private prison operator Serco after the company punished nearly 200 inmates at Clarence correctional centre in New South Wales in an “unreasonable and oppressive” manner. The incident followed the assault of a guard by a single inmate on 21 September 2023. Serco responded by locking down 175 prisoners in one section of the jail for five days, despite most having no involvement in the incident.

The NSW ombudsman deemed Serco's actions unlawful and disproportionate.

In addition to the lockdown, Serco charged 34 inmates with offences related to the assault, although the ombudsman found insufficient evidence to justify these charges. Three inmates were placed in segregation for allegedly inciting a riot, despite CCTV footage showing no such activity. Additionally, 33 inmates were placed on restrictive "behaviour management contracts," confining them to their cells for up to 22 hours a day for as long as eight weeks. The ombudsman noted that Serco failed to provide adequate support for one inmate with a cognitive impairment during its investigations.

The NSW Council for Civil Liberties (NSWCCL) has written to the City of Sydney to express our concern over the reported removal of election materials authorised by the "We Vote for Palestine" group across the City of Sydney in the lead-up to the local government election scheduled for 14 September 2024.

It has come to our attention that City of Sydney staff and contractors have been actively removing posters and election materials associated with the “We Vote for Palestine” campaign. The materials in question have been confirmed as appropriately authorised under NSW electoral laws, with the organisers having obtained confirmation from the NSW Electoral Commission regarding the lawful authorisation of their materials.

The New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties (NSWCCL) wholeheartedly supports the establishment of a Truth and Justice Commission to address injustices suffered by First Nations Peoples in Australia. The proposed Bill, currently before a Parliamentary Inquiry, represents a crucial step towards implementing the Uluru Statement from the Heart—a document NSWCCL endorses in full.

The Truth and Justice Commission, as outlined in the Bill, will have investigative powers to examine historic and ongoing injustices experienced by First Nations Peoples. Its primary aim is to provide recommendations to Parliament based on truth-telling about Australia's colonial history, paving the way for national reconciliation.  

Refugee children who have successfully completed their Higher Secondary Certificate (HSC) and those who are currently preparing to sit their exams are facing insurmountable barriers in accessing higher education. These students, many of whom have no memory of living anywhere other than Australia, are being denied the opportunity to attend university on equal terms with their peers. Instead, those allowed to enrol are often categorised as foreign students, subject to exorbitant fees and additional restrictions.

This heartbreaking situation stems from the fact that these young people, despite calling Australia home for much of their lives, continue to live without permanent visas. For over 12 years—some even longer—they have been trapped in a bureaucratic limbo that strips them of basic liberties and opportunities.

Families impacted by the injustices of the devastating ‘fast track’ process or as part of the so-called ‘legacy caseload’ have children who simply want to attend university just like their peers. This temporary status affects every part of their lives, including their ability to get work or study, their access to services, and their ability to recover from their trauma.

“The younger a child is when they come into contact with the criminal justice system, the more likely it is they will have further contact with the system across their lifetimes.”

Evidence has proven time and time again that policing, arresting and imprisoning young children not only harms the child but also fails to keep communities safe in the long term. Encountering the criminal justice system at such a young, vulnerable age can increase the likelihood of reoffending. This is especially concerning as children who exhibit criminal behaviour often have a variety of needs that are failing to be met.

A recent NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR) report found that the children sent to court were overwhelmingly from disadvantaged backgrounds with more than half being a victim of a violent offence and about a third having accessed a specialist homelessness service. Moreover, a quarter of the children were found not guilty and just over half had all charges withdrawn. Cycling these vulnerable children through courts and police cells undoubtedly causes further trauma and mistrust of the justice system, rendering it counterproductive in preventing future criminal behaviour.

The CFMEU is set to be placed into administration for at least three years after the federal parliament passed laws allowing the appointment of an administrator and the imposition of life bans on corrupt officials. 

This move follows allegations of criminal conduct and ties to organised crime within the union. 

The union criticised the law, arguing it strips members of fair process and may challenge it in court. 

Some might argue that calling for corporations to face the same scrutiny as the CFMEU is mere “whataboutism,” defending alleged union corruption. This topic arises follows claims of corruption and intimidation, as reported by Nine journalists. The union has been placed under administration for three years, and many officials have been dismissed due to legislation passed with Coalition support, though legal challenges may follow.

Some argue that this situation highlights a double standard. For example, why didn't the government threaten similar action against PwC when it was revealed that they leaked confidential tax information for profit?

RMIT Professor Anthony Forsyth acknowledges this double standard in the treatment of corporations versus unions but insists that the legislation was necessary due to the CFMEU's likely resistance to a court-appointed administrator. Meanwhile, Lydia Shelly from the NSW Council for Civil Liberties criticises the inconsistency in addressing corporate wrongdoing. 

The Australian Greens have criticised the Labor and Liberal parties for collaborating to quickly pass legislation targeting the CFMEU (Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining, and Energy Union).

They argue that this move undermines the rule of law and threatens civil liberties. The Greens claim that the rushed legislation could allow Michaelia Cash to appoint a new administrator of the CFMEU, that person potentially being Tony Abbott, if there is a change of government.

The NSW Council for Civil Liberties has serious concerns with the Federal Government’s Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Administration) Bill 2024 and the Government’s accompanying amendments. While any allegation of criminality is serious and must be addressed, the powers set out in this bill are far-reaching and establish a dangerous precedent for the trade union movement, membership-based organisations, and the rights of individuals to natural justice and procedural fairness.