The official definition of terrorism will face independent review for the first time since the September 11 attacks in 2001, amid debate over whether it covers the full range of ideologies that pose a threat to modern Australia.
Concerns about the terrorism definition re-emerged this year after the fatal mass stabbings at the Bondi Junction Westfield shopping mall and the stabbing attack on a bishop of the Assyrian Christian Orthodox church in the western Sydney suburb of Wakeley.
The independent national security legislation monitor, Jake Blight, has revealed he intends to open an inquiry next year into what should be considered a terrorist act.
Blight told Guardian Australia that much had changed since the September 11 attacks on the US heralded a wave of anti-terrorism laws and powers for police and security agencies.
“Almost quarter of a century since 9/11, it really is time that we turned our minds to the fundamental definition of terrorism that underpins so many police powers and underpins so many offences,” he said.
“What I’m trying to do is signal that I think it’s time as a nation that we looked again at the definition of a terrorist act, and I’m open to considering a range of things in that.”
Blight said it was too early to say whether misogynist or stalking behaviours or other specific kinds of violent acts might be considered for inclusion. But he wanted to conduct a “first principles” review that examined the issue in a broad context.
“I think that’s going to be a really significant review and the kind of thing that’s critical for the office to do,” Blight said.
A terrorist act is defined in the criminal code as an action or threat made with the intention of “advancing a political, religious or ideological cause”.
The action must tick off a list of criteria including that it: causes death or serious physical harm; puts a life at risk; seriously jeopardises public health or safety, or causes serious damage to property; or seriously interferes with, disrupts or destroys a designated electronic system. Designated systems include telecommunications, essential government services, a public utility or a transport system.
What constitutes an “ideological cause” is a grey area. So, too, is determining if an alleged offender’s actions were driven most by extreme religious or ideological influences or by the impact of past life experiences and personal trauma.
In his annual threat assessment in 2021, Asio’s director-general, Mike Burgess, queried the traditional terrorism definition, referring specifically to misogynists.
“We are seeing a growing number of individuals and groups that don’t fit on the left-right spectrum at all; instead, they’re motivated by a fear of societal collapse or a specific social or economic grievance or conspiracy,” Burgess said.
“For example, the violent misogynists who adhere to the involuntary celibate or ‘incel’ ideology fit into this category. So we need to use language that can accommodate groups that are outside the traditional categories.”
In his 2023 assessment, Burgess emphasised the increasingly challenging nature of counter-terrorism, highlighting the ambush and murder of two police and a bystander on a property near Wieambilla in Queensland in which the three offenders also died. Burgess called that siege an act of politically motivated violence linked to Christian extremist ideology.
In August the national terrorism threat level was raised from “possible” to “probable”.
The independent monitor’s plan to review the terrorism definition was flagged in his annual report, published last month, in which he noted that many offences were created after the September 11 attacks.
“Those offences, and many police and security agency powers, turn on the definition of a ‘terrorist act’,” Blight wrote. “Much has changed in the last 25 years, including the nature of some of the threats faced by Australia.
“It is time for an independent review to assess whether the current definition of a ‘terrorist act’ remains fit-for-purpose.”
Blight hopes to begin the review mid-2025. He is completing a review of espionage, sabotage and foreign interference offences.
“At this time, it is my intention that the next own-motion review will be related to terrorism,” he wrote in his report, “and, in particular, the definition of a ‘terrorist act’.”
