Rethink use of sniffer dogs and strip-searches at music festivals, drug summit urges NSW government
However, it made no recommendation for decriminalising the possession of small quantities of drugs, despite acknowledging 'substantial support' for the move.
The report, written by the summit's co-chairs, Carmel Tebbutt and John Brogden, made 56 recommendations after the government invited experts to inform the government on how it should deal with drug-related harms over a four-day summit held in Sydney, Griffith and Lismore.
On the topic of decriminalisation, it noted there was strong support from attenders and people who made submissions to remove criminal penalties and replace them with an enhanced diversion system as part of a health – rather than criminal – approach to drugs.
However, the report said: 'In comments made prior to the drug summit, the premier made it clear he did not believe the government had a mandate for decriminalisation and it was not on the government's agenda.'
Sign up for the Afternoon Update: Election 2025 email newsletter
The health minister, Ryan Park, came under fire during the summit after he ruled out NSW following the ACT's lead and decriminalising the possession of small quantities of drugs before recommendations had been handed down.
In a speech after the comments, Prof Dan Howard said the government did have a mandate for decriminalisation, which came from the consensus among all peak expert bodies and prior reports including his own, the 2020 special commission of inquiry into the drug 'ice'.
The report recommended the government cease the use of drug detection dogs and strip-searches for suspected drug detection at music festivals where the pill-testing trials were under way. The report asked the government to consider extending that ban to all music festivals.
Sam Lee, a supervising solicitor at Redfern Legal Centre, welcomed the recommendation, telling Guardian Australia after the report was released that the evidence shows the use of drug dogs and strip-searches increases risky behaviour such as preloading.
'To keep the community safe, strip-searches and drug dogs should be banned completely for suspicion of minor drug possession – not just at music [festivals],' she said.
The report also recommended that the government legislate that people can mount a 'medical defence' that is either assessed by police at the roadside or by a court for people who are medically prescribed cannabis caught under the influence while driving.
Sign up to Afternoon Update: Election 2025
Our Australian afternoon update breaks down the key election campaign stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters
after newsletter promotion
It has also recommended releasing within 12 months a 10-year strategy to reduce drug-related harms, significantly increase funding and extend funding contracts for services to five years.
The report included four recommendations for Aboriginal social and emotional wellbeing and cultural safety, including prioritising Aboriginal-led prevention.
Park said on Wednesday upon releasing the report that 'not everyone agreed on everything, but we sought to have every voice listened to'.
'It sought to reflect the many different parts of our community touched by this challenge – healthcare, justice, housing, social services and those disproportionately impacted by illicit drugs,' he said.
'The government will now carefully consider these findings and respond in due course.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
11 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Legislation ‘forthcoming' to stop Adams internment compensation
A Supreme Court judgment in 2020 paved the way for the former Sinn Fein president to secure compensation over his internment without trial in the early 1970s. Mr Adams won his appeal to overturn historical convictions for two attempted prison breaks, after he was interned without trial in 1973 at Long Kesh internment camp, also known as Maze Prison, near Lisburn. The Supreme Court ruled that his detention was unlawful because the interim custody order (ICO) used to initially detain him had not been 'considered personally' by then secretary of state for Northern Ireland Willie Whitelaw. At the time of the case, the previous government contended that the ICOs were lawful because of a long-standing convention, known as the Carltona principle, where officials and junior ministers routinely act in the name of the secretary of state. Mr Adams subsequently successfully challenged a decision to deny an application for compensation for his detention. However, the Legacy Act stopped such payouts to Mr Adams and other former internees. The Act retrospectively validated the ICOs to make them lawful and halted civil claims related to the orders. However, in February last year, the High Court in Belfast ruled that the provisions of the Act related to the ICOs were incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. The Labour Government has not appealed that judgment and has tabled a remedial order in Parliament that will repeal various parts of the Legacy Act. The draft laws to be introduced by Mr Benn will aim to give effect the block on payouts to former detainees in a lawful manner. In a question to Mr Benn, Labour MP Chris McDonald asked 'what steps he is taking to address the issue of interim custody orders that were not signed by his predecessor' in relation to Mr Adams's case. Responding in a written answer on June 26, the Secretary of State said: 'The main issue here is the application of the Carltona principle in the context of ICOs. 'The previous Government's attempt to address this following the 2020 Supreme Court judgment in Adams has been found by the Northern Ireland courts to be unlawful and we need to find a better way of reaffirming this principle. 'The Government will therefore legislate to address this issue in forthcoming primary legislation.'
Daily Mail
a day ago
- Daily Mail
BREAKING NEWS Indigenous Voice to Paliament on the way for Australian state as treaty deal nears
A permanent Indigenous voice to parliament is on its way for another Australian state but won't be written into its constitution as a treaty deal nears. Victoria is set to follow South Australia in establishing a state-based, democratically elected body to provide advice on laws and policies related to Aboriginal people. The creation of the ongoing body has been on the table since January as part of treaty talks between the state government and First Peoples' Assembly of Victoria. Premier Jacinta Allan indicated it was likely to be agreed to and, unlike the failed federal voice, would not require constitutional change. 'The key difference to the referendum that was put nationwide a couple of years ago is that was changing the constitution,' she told reporters on Monday. 'This is not changing the Victorian constitution.' Victoria recorded the highest 'yes' vote of any state at 45.85 per cent in the 2023 referendum. The ACT (61.3 per cent) was the only state or territory to back the proposal. SA is the only jurisdiction to legislate a state-based, democratically elected body for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The SA Voice is made up of 46 Aboriginal members elected across six regional districts. A statewide Victorian treaty is expected to be struck later in 2025, with enabling legislation to then go before parliament. The Victorian opposition withdrew its support for treaty in January 2024 following the failed referendum, citing concerns about cultural heritage laws. It means the Labor government will need the support of as many as six upper-house crossbench MPs for the treaty agreement. Treaty negotiations have centred on making sure Aboriginal Victorians could make decisions on matters that impacted their mob, assembly co-chair Rueben Berg said. Mr Berg said the talks also covered the assembly playing an ongoing role in truth-telling, keeping government accountable and developing leadership capability for its people. 'Treaty recognises that Aboriginal people are the experts on our own lives,' the Gunditjmara man said. Ms Allan pointed out the assembly, which essentially already performs the same function as a state-based voice, has been operating since 2018. After 'decade after decade' of stagnating and worsening outcomes for Indigenous people, the premier is pleading for a change of approach. 'It's not acceptable ... that the rate of Indigenous kids finishing education is something like 57 per cent, far far below the statewide average,' Ms Allan said. 'That the number of Indigenous people accessing homelessness services has gone up, that the number of Aboriginal women accessing breast screening has gone down.' Opposition Leader Brad Battin said the coalition would not support a state voice to parliament, declaring it 'flies in the face of democracy' following the referendum result. 'I'll continue to stand with those Victorians and say the voice is not needed,' he said.
Reuters
2 days ago
- Reuters
Appeals court weighs Trump's use of wartime law to deport Venezuelans
WASHINGTON, June 30 (Reuters) - A federal appeals court will hear oral arguments on Monday in what is likely to be a decisive lawsuit over whether President Donald Trump's administration can use an 18th-century law to speed up deportations. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is weighing whether a group of detainees at the Bluebonnet Detention Facility in Anson, Texas, can be deported under the Alien Enemies Act. The court hearing is set to begin at 2:00 p.m. EDT (1800 GMT). The Trump administration has said the detainees are members of Tren de Aragua, a violent Venezuelan gang. The American Civil Liberties Union, which represents some of the detainees, has disputed the claims of gang membership and says many of its clients have legitimate asylum claims. The 5th Circuit, an intermediate appeals court based in New Orleans, has a reputation as one of the most conservative in the country. In a March 14 proclamation, Trump said he would use the Act to swiftly detain and deport members of Tren de Aragua. Trump asserted that the gang is a state-sponsored international terrorist organization that has invaded United States territory. The 1798 law has historically only been used in wartime, and is best known for its use to intern Japanese, Italian and German immigrants during World War Two. The Supreme Court ruled in April that challenges to removal under the law must be brought in the federal judicial districts where detainees are being held. The court said it was not resolving the validity of the administration's reliance on that law to carry out the deportations. Since then, challenges to the president's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act have been unfolding in courts across the country, and several judges have blocked deportations under the law within their judicial districts. The case before the 5th Circuit briefly reached the Supreme Court in May. Without weighing in on the merits of the ACLU's arguments, the high court granted a request by the organization that removals be halted while the case unfolds. The 5th Circuit case has moved through the courts quickly since then, and is widely expected to be the one in which the Supreme Court eventually decides whether Trump's March 14 proclamation invoking the statute was constitutional.
