The horrifying attack at Westfield Bondi Junction has shaken Sydney and all of Australia. As we mourn the victims, a heated debate has swiftly emerged: should police have greater stop and search powers to prevent similar tragedies?
In the wake of this violence, calls for proactive solutions are understandable. However, it’s crucial to weigh the potential benefits of expanded policing against the very real risks to our fundamental civil liberties.
Read our recent article addressing an important, topical question ‘Should Gender-Based Targeting Be Included in Terrorism Laws?’
The Bondi Junction Attack & Police Interactions
The shocking attack took the lives of six people who have now been identified. The victims include Ashlee Good, Faraz Tahir, Dawn Singleton, Jade Young, Pikria Darchia, and Yixuan Cheng.
According to media reports, Joel Cauchi has been named as the attacker. On the day of the attack, Cauchi entered Westfield Shopping Centre in Bondi Junction and stabbed six people to death, injuring many others. Some of the injured victims are still receiving treatment in hospital while the rest of Sydney, and Australia, mourns the victims.
Joel Cauchi’s history with the police and his mental health
The attacker apparently suffered with mental health problems since he was 17. In recent times, his mental health had declined. Shortly after the attack, police stated that the devastating incident was not a terrorist attack. However, the attack was clearly an attack on women. When Cauchi’s father was asked by the press why did he target women, he said that all his son wanted was a girlfriend.
While Cauchi suffered from mental health issues, many people with the same conditions do not pose a risk to the public. In fact, research shows that only a very small number of those with mental health problems commit violent acts.
While Cauchi did have some history of contact with the police in the past, according to police, his actions did not warrant intervention. Queensland Police Assistant Commissioner, Roger Lowe, stated:
“The man has never been arrested by police in Queensland nor has he been charged with any criminal offence.”
“He has been in contact with the police primarily in the last four to five years —would be the most contact we’ve had with them.”
This still raises difficult questions. Could greater police powers have prevented this attack? If an individual exhibits concerning behaviour, where is the line between respecting their rights and the imperative to protect public safety?
Understanding Stop and Search Powers
Currently, in NSW, police officers can stop and search a person if they have ‘reasonable suspicion’ that the person is carrying illegal items, like stolen goods or prohibited weapons. This ‘reasonable suspicion’ standard is intentionally somewhat vague, allowing officers discretion in assessing a situation.
Proactive police gone wrong – The Brad Balzan Case
For example, in recent times the topic of proactive policing has been hotly debated following the tragic death of Brad Balzan. Our client, Adam Balzan, is the father of Brad, a young man who was shot dead by a police officer in a proactive policing measure gone terribly wrong. According to reports, police targeted this boy because he was simply wearing a hoodie on a hot day.
In the end, officers chased Brad into his backyard and shot him dead. As a result, many have questioned if proactive policing measures are fair.
Our Principal Solicitor, Peter O´Brien, is litigating for Adam. During an interview with ABC news about the case, Peter stated that the case “is the worst possible outcome imaginable of proactive policing gone wrong.”
Many times, officers have been found to be unfairly targeting people of colour and those in lower socio-economic neighbourhoods. If proactive police measures were not in place, police would not have likely had the power to follow Brad, and a young man might still be alive.
Do we need to increase police’s power to stop and search following the Bondi attack?
Like always, there is another side of the above debate. And in light of the Bondi Junction attack, there is pressure to expand police’s stop and search powers.
This increase could involve:
- Lowering the threshold for suspicion: Allowing searches based on less concrete evidence.
- Expanding search locations: Designating shopping centres, or even wider public areas, as zones where warrantless searches are permitted.
The Queensland Example: Jack’s Law
Queensland’s Jack’s Law offers a model for what expanded stop and search might look like. This legislation allows police to use metal detectors to search people without a warrant in designated ‘safe night precincts,’ on public transport, and at transit hubs. Proponents argue this deters weapon-carrying and creates a safer environment.
In December, it was reported that 400 weapons were seized by the police since the passing of Jack’s Law in March. In addition, this particular proactive policing measure resulted in 1070 people being charged for almost 1900 offences, of which most were related to weapon and drug crimes.
Arguments FOR Expanding Stop and Search
Those supporting increased police powers for expanding stop and search argue:
- Prevention is Key: Proactive policing can disrupt potential attacks before they occur.
- Weapons are a Threat: Knives and other weapons are readily accessible and used in violent crimes.
- Police Need Tools: Greater powers give police the means to effectively protect the public.
- Targeted Approach: Expanded powers don’t mean everyone is searched; police can focus their efforts based on intelligence and behaviour.
Arguments AGAINST Expanding Stop and Search
Opponents of expansive stop and search powers raise serious concerns:
- Civil Rights Erosion: Warrantless searches chip away at the presumption of innocence.
- Disproportionate Impact: Marginalized communities often face over-policing, leading to distrust and further harm.
- Slippery Slope: Once powers are expanded, they’re rarely rolled back.
- Ineffectiveness: Those intent on violence may find ways to circumvent detection.
The NSW Context
NSW has a strong tradition of respecting individual rights. Any changes to stop and search powers must be carefully considered in this light. The question is whether increased police powers strike the right balance between security and individual freedoms – a balance that is always difficult to attain.
What’s the best approach?
This crucial issue demands a nuanced and evidence-based approach. Knee-jerk reactions in the wake of tragedy rarely lead to sound policy. We need:
- Data-Driven Decisions: A thorough analysis of how expanded search powers might operate in NSW, drawing on lessons from Queensland and other jurisdictions.
- Public Consultation: An open dialogue involving citizens, law enforcement, legal experts, and civil liberties advocates.
- Holistic Approach: Police powers are one tool. We must also invest in mental health support, violence prevention programs, and addressing the root causes of crime.
The Bondi Junction attack was a devastating loss. However, let’s ensure that any response honours the victims by making our society both safer and more just.
