This bill became law on Nov 24th, 2023.
Immigration, border & security
Australia's special stop, search and seizure powers for terrorism cases now stay in force until 7 December 2026.
Key terrorism police powers were due to expire, while earlier reviews had supported keeping them and adding further safeguards. This bill extends those powers to 7 December 2026 and adds safeguards, reporting and more flexible control-order conditions.
Australia already had special terrorism powers for stop, search, seizure, control orders and preventative detention. A 2017 INSLMThe independent reviewer of Australia's national security laws. Its review is one of the main reasons the bill was introduced. review supported the continued necessity and safeguards for the stop-search-seize powers, and a later parliamentary review backed extending key powers with further checks. The 2023 bill responded by extending those powers to 7 December 2026 and adding clearer safeguards, complaint rights and more flexible control-order conditions.
The main criticism was that the bill keeps extraordinary counterterrorism powers such as warrantless searches, control orders and preventative detention that critics say were meant to be temporary and still cut too deeply into basic legal rights. That case was raised most clearly by the Greens, while the Coalition still supported the bill but pressed for stronger review and post-entry warrantA warrant police must apply for after entering premises without one under emergency terrorism powers. The bill adds this as a follow-up safeguard after urgent entries. safeguards.
Hon Mark Dreyfus KC, MP introduced this bill. In the recorded Senate second-reading vote, support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Jacqui Lambie Network, One Nation; opposition came from Greens.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 24 Nov 2023
Final passage
No counted final vote
1 recorded vote on the bill was found earlier in passage, but the final chamber agreement was not a counted division.
Passage speed
106 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
Australia's special stop, search and seizure powers for terrorism cases now stay in force until 7 December 2026.
Ministers must weigh whether a declared terrorism security zone is reasonable, proportionate and no broader than needed before locking down a Commonwealth place.
People stopped and searched for terrorism-related items must be told they can complain to the Commonwealth OmbudsmanAn oversight office that handles complaints about Commonwealth agencies. The bill requires police to tell searched people they can complain here in some cases. or the relevant state or territory police complaints body, unless urgent circumstances make that impracticable.
Police who enter premises without a warrant under emergency terrorism powers must then apply for a post-entry warrantA warrant police must apply for after entering premises without one under emergency terrorism powers. The bill adds this as a follow-up safeguard after urgent entries. about that entry.
Control orders can now include a wider range of tailored court conditions, and a person under an order can seek a temporary exemption from some conditions.
Extend the operation of Division 3A of Part IAA of the Crimes Act (which provides for police powers in relation to terrorism) for a further three years to 7 December 2026.Counter-Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment explanatory memorandum
Require the Minister to consider particular matters before declaring a ‘prescribed security zone’, including the reasonableness and proportionality of the impact of a declaration on the rights of persons in that location, the duration of the declaration, and the availability and effectiveness of any Commonwealth or State or Territory powers that would assist in preventing or responding to a terrorist act.Counter-Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment explanatory memorandum
Require a police officer exercising powers under section 3UD, which allows police to stop and search for a terrorism-related item, to inform the person who is searched of their right to make a complaint to the Commonwealth Ombudsman or applicable State or Territory police oversight body or bodies, unless informing the person is not reasonably practicable due to circumstances of urgency.Counter-Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment explanatory memorandum
(a) apply to an assessment officer for a warrant (a post‑entry warrant) under this section in relation to the entry to the premises; andCounter-Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2023 final Act text
Align the conditions that can be imposed as a part of a control order with those that can be imposed as part of an extended supervision order (ESO) – in other words, provide that a court can impose any conditions it considered appropriate so the control order can be better tailored to addressed the risk profile of the individual concerned. This would also include conditions from which the controlee may apply for a temporary exemption.Counter-Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment explanatory memorandum
Context
Australia already had special terrorism powers for stop, search, seizure, control orders and preventative detention. A 2017 INSLMThe independent reviewer of Australia's national security laws. Its review is one of the main reasons the bill was introduced. review supported the continued necessity and safeguards for the stop-search-seize powers, and a later parliamentary review backed extending key powers with further checks. The 2023 bill responded by extending those powers to 7 December 2026 and adding clearer safeguards, complaint rights and more flexible control-order conditions.
INSLMThe independent reviewer of Australia's national security laws. Its review is one of the main reasons the bill was introduced. supports keeping terrorism search powers
The Independent National Security Legislation MonitorThe independent reviewer of Australia's national security laws. Its review is one of the main reasons the bill was introduced.’s 2017 review concluded the stop, search and seizure powers remained necessary, proportionate and supported by appropriate safeguards.
Counter-Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment explanatory memorandum ↗Parliamentary review recommends extending powers with stronger safeguards
The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and SecurityA parliamentary committee that reviews national security laws. Here it is used as the body whose review helped shape the bill's safeguards.'s AFPThe national police force. In this bill, the AFP is the agency using the terrorism stop, search, seizure and control order powers. powers review shaped the bill by backing the continuation of key counterterrorism powers alongside tighter oversight and reporting rules.
Counter-Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment explanatory memorandum ↗Government introduces the bill to extend expiring terrorism powers
The Attorney-General introduced the bill to keep stop, search, seizure, control orderA court order that can impose conditions on a person to reduce terrorism risk. This bill keeps the regime in force and gives courts more flexible conditions to use. and preventative detention powers operating until 7 December 2026 while implementing review-backed safeguards.
Hansard ↗Parliament passes the bill
Both houses passed the bill after amendments including a post-entry warrantA warrant police must apply for after entering premises without one under emergency terrorism powers. The bill adds this as a follow-up safeguard after urgent entries. framework for emergency entries, clearing the way for the new safeguards and extensions to take effect.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Royal AssentThe final step that makes a bill law after Parliament passes it. The page says this bill received Royal Assent in November 2023. keeps the counterterrorism powers in force until 2026
Royal AssentThe final step that makes a bill law after Parliament passes it. The page says this bill received Royal Assent in November 2023. turned the bill into law, continuing the powers to 7 December 2026 and locking in new proportionality, complaint and control-order rules.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Referred to Committee (10/08/2023): Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and SecurityA parliamentary committee that reviews national security laws. Here it is used as the body whose review helped shape the bill's safeguards.; Committee report (19/10/2023)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Consideration in detail debate
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Recorded vote: 25 to 9.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that makes a bill law after Parliament passes it. The page says this bill received Royal Assent in November 2023., turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The main criticism was that the bill keeps extraordinary counterterrorism powers such as warrantless searches, control orders and preventative detention that critics say were meant to be temporary and still cut too deeply into basic legal rights. That case was raised most clearly by the Greens, while the Coalition still supported the bill but pressed for stronger review and post-entry warrantA warrant police must apply for after entering premises without one under emergency terrorism powers. The bill adds this as a follow-up safeguard after urgent entries. safeguards.
Most criticism focused on civil-liberties and safeguard concerns rather than rejecting counterterrorism powers altogether.
Extraordinary powers kept in place
Critics argued the bill wrongly extends exceptional terrorism powers that should have remained temporary, including warrantless stop and search powers, control orders and preventative detention orders, with too little justification for keeping them in ordinary law.
Safeguards and review still needed
Some supporters said the bill needed tighter oversight in practice, especially proper review of the powers and follow-through on the recommendation for post-entry warrants after emergency warrantless entries to premises.
Further sources
Votes
The bill passed both chambers on the voices. The counted divisions below were about amendments or procedure, not final passage.
House agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Senate agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Passed 25 to 9. Support came from Labor, Liberal Party, Jacqui Lambie Network, and One Nation. Opposition came from Greens.
Amendments grouped by chamber. Where APH reports aggregate counts, the package card summarizes the matching public amendment sheets by source theme.
House
Government amendments would add bill text requiring police officers who enter premises without a warrant to apply for a post-entry warrant as soon as practicable.
Passed on the voices
The chamber agreed to this amendment package without a counted vote. APH records the agreed count by amendment, while the source documents are grouped into amendment sheets.
These are votes on the bill itself rather than amendment votes.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Dreyfus supports the bill and says it updates and extends key counterterrorism powers while adding stronger oversight and safeguards.
Read in Hansard ↗Shoebridge says the Greens will oppose the bill because it keeps in place extraordinary counter-terrorism powers, including warrantless stop and search powers, control orders and preventative detention orders, which he says should have been temporary and remain unjustified.
Read in Hansard ↗Pauline Hanson says One Nation will support the bill because she sees it as necessary to strengthen police and security powers against terrorism.
Read in Hansard ↗Brown supports the bill, saying it strengthens and extends key counter-terrorism powers while adding stronger safeguards, oversight and reporting.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
5 speakers · 6 contributions · 5 support
“The Bill would provide for the continuation and enhancement of important counter-terrorism powers that contribute to the safety and security of all Australians. It strikes a balance between ensuring our law enforcement agencies have the powers they need to manage the threat of terrorism, while protecting the rights of individuals through stronger oversight and safeguards. The Government thanks the Intelligence and Security Committee for its review and will table the Government response to the report shortly.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The bill would provide for the continuation and enhancement of important counterterrorism powers that contribute to the safety and security of all Australians. It strikes a balance between ensuring our law enforcement agencies have the powers they need to manage the threat of terrorism, while protecting the rights of individuals through stronger oversight and safeguards. The government thanks the Intelligence and Security Committee for its review and will table the government response to the report shortly.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by Matt Thistlethwaite on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Thistlethwaite supports the bill and says it updates Australia's counterterrorism laws while adding safeguards, oversight, and court controls to keep the balance between community safety and civil liberties. He presents the extra powers as necessary to let law enforcement respond to terrorism and violent extremism.
“This bill, the Counter-Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2023, is about ensuring that we regularly update our counterterrorism laws in this country. It will ensure that our law enforcement agencies are equipped with the tools that they need to respond to terrorism and violent extremism, keeping Australian safe into the future. The bill provides for the continuation and enhancement of key counterterrorism powers. The bill also, importantly, enhances safeguards. It ensures that we get the balance right between protecting Australians and protecting civil liberties. That's not an easy thing to do, but we believe that, because we have a committee like the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Security and intelligence that is able to thoroughly look over proposals such as this and recommend changes to the parliament, we are able to get the balance right in Australia. The powers that are promoted by this are always subject to the rule of law and procedural fairness, and that's what comes through in the report of the PJCIS.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Thistlethwaite supports the bill, saying it continues essential counterterrorism powers while adding safeguards, stronger oversight, and more transparency. He argues the extensions and controls keep law enforcement effective against current threats and better align the powers with the rule of law.
“This bill would provide for the continuation of key counterterrorism powers. It would also enhance safeguards and oversight mechanisms for these powers, providing appropriate checks and balances which promote the rule of law and procedural fairness.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
“As a whole, this bill is part of the Albanese Labor government's broad commitment to ensuring our institutions are always appropriately resourced and given the necessary powers to respond and defend Australia's sovereignty and security. The government will continue to work responsibly and constructively with our security and law enforcement institutions to meet the challenge posed by the threat of terrorism. At the same time, we recognise the importance of striking the right balance between protecting civil liberties and ensuring that Australians live without the threat of terrorism looming over their everyday lives. That is a task that, as Chair of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, I take especially seriously. This bill strikes that balance. It maintains necessary powers for the government to act in the interests of public safety and ensures the promotion of the rule of law and procedural fairness.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The government thanks senators who have contributed to this debate, and states and territories for their engagement, and we commend the bill for passage.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
3 speakers · 3 support
“I also rise to speak about my support for the Counter-Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2023, subject to the review by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. I acknowledge the presence of the member for Deakin, who was also chair of that committee and did a magnificent job. I've also been a member. I do have concerns about the bill. I'm not necessarily blaming the government. When I was first elected in 2004 under the Howard government, I raised these concerns. My background is with the Victorian Police counterterrorism unit, so I'm putting a bit of a policing perspective on it. When it comes to preventative detention, it was initially set up, in the first place, for if law enforcement had a person who could potentially be a suspect. They might have been looking at him, and they definitely did not have enough to arrest that person, but they got some intelligence where they believed they'd need to act. The intention was to go and arrest that person and hold them in preventative detention.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The coalition will always support sensible changes which ensure our legislation is fit for purpose to enable our law enforcement agencies to protect Australians from terrorism. That is why we wanted appropriate due diligence of this bill by the PJCIS and we wanted to ensure that this legislation will deliver that outcome: a safer Australia with the proper safeguards to do that. That is why, subject to the report of the PJCIS that has been tabled today, we will be supporting the passage of this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The coalition will always support sensible changes which ensure our legislation is fit for purpose to enable our law enforcement agencies to protect Australians from terrorism. That is why we'll be supporting the passage of this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
1 speaker · 1 oppose
“The Greens note that there are some cosmetic improvements bring brought into these regimes: marginally better oversight and some slightly better reporting. But at the core of this bill is the continuation of a series of detention mechanisms; warrantless stop, search and detain powers for police; and a control order regime that should not form part of our law. The sun should set on these powers; it should set in a few short weeks and they should not be extended to December 2026. For those reasons, the Greens oppose this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
2 speakers · 2 support
“We support the responsible minister having the power to declare a prescribed security zone to ensure additional security measures can be implemented when and where it is necessary to prevent or respond to a terrorist attack. We note that the minister must give consideration to the impact such a declaration may have on the rights of Australians in the affected area. We're forced to remind the Senate that no such consideration was given to fundamental human rights during the COVID-19 pandemic—nothing. We also note that the bill clarifies the need for parliamentary oversight of these declarations. One Nation supports the extension of the control order and prevention detention order to December 2026. We consider these absolutely necessary for the safety and security of Australian citizens because there is no compromise that may be reached with these maniacs or their treacherous supporters in Australia. We support the use of post-entry warrants, ensuring that police and other authorities can act immediately to prevent a terrorist attack that may not wait for a judge to make up their mind. One Nation strongly supports the use of post-sentence orders against people convicted of terrorist offences.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“Strong steps must be taken to exclude Islamic terrorists from ever setting foot here. Strong steps must be taken to ensure that the judiciary is entitled to strip citizenship from immigrants as part of their sentencing for committing heinous crimes. More importantly, strong steps are needed and must be taken to ensure that vetting of the quality and the suitability of potential immigrants investigates eliminating extremist activists from spreading their poison in our Australian society and creating homegrown terrorists. I will be supporting this bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · Consideration in detail: amendments considered
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
House · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Recorded vote: 25 to 9.
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Senate · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that makes a bill law after Parliament passes it. The page says this bill received Royal Assent in November 2023., turning the bill into an Act.
Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security; Committee report (19/10/2023)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (10 Aug 2023): Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security; Committee report (19 Oct 2023)
APH bill page notes
