Terrorism offending in New South Wales AND JUSTICE

AIM TodescribeterrorismoffencesfinalisedinNewSouthWales(NSW)criminalcourtssincetheintroductionofspecificterrorismoffencesinAustraliain2002,andtoprovideanoverviewofthecharacteristicsandoffendinghistoryofoffenderswhohavebeenconvictedoftheseoffences.

METHOD DataonallterrorismoffencesfinalisedinNSWcourtswereextractedfromtheNSWBureauofCrimeStatisticsandResearchRe-offendingDatabase.Thenumberandtypesofterrorismoffencesarepresented,andfrequenciesofbothnon-terrorismandtotaloffencesarepresentedtodeterminethedegreetowhichoffendersspecialiseinterrorismoffending.Demographicandcriminogeniccharacteristics,includingLevelofServiceInventory-Revised(LSI-R)scores,arethenexaminedforbothspecialistandnon-specialistterrorismoffenders.

RESULTS BetweenJuly2002andMay2020,72proventerrorismoffenceswerefinalisedinNSWcriminalcourtsfor48offenders.Approximatelytwothirdsofallprincipalterrorismoffencesrelatedtotheproactivepolicingofterrorism.Forty-twopercent(n=20)ofterrorismoffenderswereconvictedofonlyterrorismoffences.Theremaining58percentwere,orhadpreviouslybeen,convictedofatleastonenon-terrorismoffence,mostcommonlyoffencesagainstjusticeprocedures,governmentsecurityandgovernmentoperations.Whilethedemographicprofileofthosewhocommittedterrorismoffenceswasfairlysimilar,terrorismoffendersconvictedofonlyterrorismoffencesvariedintermsoftheircriminogeniccharacteristics.

CONCLUSION Terrorism-relatedchargesareuncommoninNSWcriminalcourts,andmostcommonlyrelatetoproactivepolicing.

1

terrorism offenders specialisation criminogenic riskKEYWORDS

CRIME AND JUSTICE STATISTICS

BUREAU BRIEF

Terrorism offending in New South WalesStewart Boiteux

NUMBER 150 | JANUARY 2021

Suggestedcitation:Boiteux,S.(2021).Terrorism offending in New South Wales(BureauBriefNo.150).Sydney:NSWBureauofCrimeStatisticsandResearch.

NSW BUREAU OF CRIME STATISTICS AND RESEARCH 2

TERRORISM OFFENDING IN NEW SOUTH WALES

INTRODUCTIONWhileterrorismoffendingisnotanewphenomenon,itwasnotuntiltheeventsofSeptember112001intheUnitedStates,andtheresultingResolution 1373 of the United Nations Security Council 2001,thatspecificoffencestocriminaliseterrorismwerecodifiedintoAustralianlaw(undertheSecurity Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2002 (Cth); Williams,2011).Priortotheenactmentofthislegislation,terrorismoffenceswereprosecutedunderexistingcriminallaw.Aprimarymotivationforthedirectcriminalisationofterrorismwastheneedtoreacttoterrorismproactively,focusingonthedeterrenceandpreventionofterroristoffendingratherthantheprosecutionofterrorismonceithadoccurred(Ruddock,2007).Broadly,theamendinglegislationcreatednewoffencesintheCriminal Code Act 1995(Cth)tocriminaliseterrorismontwolevels–offencesthatwhencarriedoutwouldconstituteterrorismoffending,andproactivepolicingoffences(McCulloch&Pickering,2010).

SincetheinitialintroductionofterrorismoffencesinJuly2002,thelegislativeenvironmentgoverningterrorismoffendinginAustraliahasexpandedrapidly,incorporatingfurthermechanismstoallowforproactivepolicingofterrorismoffending.Theseincludetheintroductionofcontrolandsupervisionorderstorestricttheactionsofsuspectedandpreviouslyconvictedoffenderswhoposeanunacceptableriskofcommittingaseriousterrorismoffence,andarangeofcriminaloffencesforbreachingtheseorders(McCulloch&Pickering,2010;Smith&Nolan,2016).

Whilesomelegalscholarshavedescribedthelegislativeenvironmentasoneof“hyper-legislation”(Roach,2011),pointingtothe82anti-terrorlawsthathavebeenenactedsince2001(McGarrity&Blackbourn,2019),littleresearchexistsexaminingtheextenttowhichtheselawshavebeenutilisedorthecharacteristicsofoffenderswhohavebeenconvictedofterrorismoffences.Despitetherepeatedrecommendationforroutinegovernmentreportingonterrorismoffending,nogovernmentagencyinAustraliahasadoptedthepractice(IndependentNationalSecurityLegislationMonitor[INSLM],2020).

Indesigningapproachestocombatterrorismoffending,acommonthemeofresearch,policydiscussionsandtargetedpreventionprogramshasbeenanemphasisonthecriminogenicneedsandmotivesofterrorismoffenderscomparedwithmoregeneraloffenders(RTIInternational[RTI],2017).Thisdifferentiationisoftenjustifiedonthebasisthatterrorismoffendingisfundamentallydifferentfromothertypesofcrime,asitrequiresadistinctanduniquesocio-politicalmotive.Thisassumeddifferencehasmotivatedthewidespreaddevelopmentofterrorismspecificpreventionandcounteringviolentextremismprograms,withloworotherwiseunknowndegreesofsuccess(Harris-Hogan,2020;Lum,Kennedy,&Sherley,2006).Thetreatmentofterrorismoffendersasahomogeneousgroupmayhoweverbeproblematicgivenboththewiderangeofoffencesthatconstituteterrorismoffending,andthatthedegreetowhichoffendersspecialiseinthesetypesofcrimesiscurrentlynotwellunderstood.

Australian evidence

Akeylimitationofexistingresearchonterrorismoffendingisthatresearchershavetypicallyreliedonsecondarysourcesofinformationsuchasbooks,articlesandmediareportingratherthanquantitativeanalysisofprimarydatafromlargescaleadministrativedatasets(Schuurman,2018).Thesesecondarydatasourcesmaycontaininaccurateorincompleteinformation,and/orreflectbiasesinthereportingofparticularcases(Dugan&Distler,2016).ThisisalsotrueofAustralianresearchundertakentodate.Shanahan(2020),forexample,constructedaterrorismeventdatabasefrompubliclyavailablemediainformationtoquantifyterrorismrelatedoffendingbyAustralianJihadis.1Ofthetotalsampleof183people(86fromNewSouthWales[NSW]),mostoffenderswereidentifiedasbeingmale(83percent)andtheaverageageatthetimeofoffencewas24years.TheaverageAustralianJihadiwasalsoreportedtohavenoprioroffendinghistory.WhilethisstudyprovidesvaluableinformationonthebackgroundofJihaditerroristsinAustralia,therestrictedsample,theinabilitytoverifythequalityofunderlyingdata,andthehighdegreeofmissinginformationinthesample,limitstheusefulnessoftheseresults,particularlyforgeneralisingtothebroaderoffenderpopulation.

1 DefinedasindividualswhoareknowntohavejoinedradicalIslamistterroristorganisationsorthosethathavebeenchargedwithterrorismoffences.



AmoreconcentratedanalysiswasrecentlyundertakenbyVictoriaPolice(2018).TheyreportedthenumberofterrorismoffencesproceededagainstbypoliceinVictoriabetween2005and2018,aswellasthecharacteristicsofoffenderschargedwiththeseoffences.TheresultsareconsistentwiththosereportedbyShanahan(2020).Ofthe41peoplechargedwithaterrorismoffenceduringthisperiod,allbutonewasmaleand47percentwereagedbetween21and25years.Atthetimeofpublication,only19ofthe41peoplechargedwithaterrorismoffenceinVictoriahadbeenfoundguilty.Afurther9peoplehadbeenacquittedofallterrorismcharges,orhadtheirterrorismchargeswithdrawnorstruckout,2 while13werestillonbailorremandpendingfinalisationoftheirmatterincourt.

The current study

ThecurrentstudyusesNSWpopulationlevelinformationfromalinkedadministrativedatabaseofcourtfinalisationstodescribethefullpopulationofoffendersconvictedofaterrorismoffence.Thepurposeofthisbriefistoanswerthreequestions:

1. Howmany,andwhattypeof,terrorismoffenceshavebeenfinalisedinNSWcriminalcourtssincetheintroductionofspecificoffencestocriminaliseterrorismin2002?

2. HowmanyoffendershavebeenchargedwithaterrorismoffenceinNSW?Whatarethedemographicandcriminogeniccharacteristicsoftheseoffenders?

3. Towhatdegreeareterrorismoffendersspecialists?Whattypesofnon-terrorismoffencesarecommittedbyterrorismoffenders?

METHOD

Data source

InformationonfinalisedcourtappearanceswassourcedfromtheNSWBureauofCrimeStatisticsandResearchRe-offendingDatabase(ROD)forallindividualschargedwithatleastoneterrorismoffencebetweenJuly2002andMay2020.TheRODprovidesinformationonallfinalisedcourtappearancesinNSWsince1994.Thefinalsamplecomprisedinformationon53peoplechargedwithaterrorismoffence,ofwhom48hadatleastoneterrorismchargeproven.Ofthefivepeoplewithoutaproventerrorismcharge,threewerefoundguiltyofconcurrentnon-terrorismchargesandtwohadnooffencesproven.Thedatasetcontainedinformationonthetypeofterrorismoffences,whethertheterrorismoffencewastheprincipaloffenceinthatmatter,priorandconcurrentoffendingofthedefendant,andanypenaltiesimposedbythecourt.Forthisanalysistheprincipaloffencewasdefinedastheoffencewhichreceivedthemostseriouspenaltyattheindexcourtappearance.3Notethatinafewcaseswheretheterrorismoffencewasproven,itwasnottheprincipaloffence.

Definition of a terrorism offence

ThedefinitionofterrorismoffencesusedinthestudybroadlyfollowstheAustralianlegaldefinitionofterrorism.ThisisdefinedinSection3oftheCrimes Act 1914(Cth),toincludeanoffenceagainst:

y SubdivisionAofDivision72oftheCriminalCodeAct

y SubdivisionBofDivision80oftheCriminalCodeAct

2 “WhentheCourthasclosedacase,usuallywiththerightforthecasetobebroughtagainatalaterdate.ThistermalsoreferstowhentheCourtrulesthatpartsofaclaimordefencecannotbereliedonandthesepartsarestruckout”(SupremeCourtofVictoria,2020).3 Iftherewasmorethanoneoffencewhichreceivedthesamequantumofthesamepenaltytype,includingthesamequantumoftotalsentenceandnon-paroleperiod,theoffencewiththehighestMedianSentenceRanking(MSR)wasselectedastheprincipalterrorismoffence.TheMSRisarankingmeasureofoffenceseriousnessthatisassociatedwiththeAustralianandNewZealandStandardOffenceClassification(ANZSOC)groupofeachoffence(seeMacKinnell,Poletti,&Holmes,2010).



y Part5.3or5.5oftheCriminalCodeAct

y Part 4oftheCharter of the United Nations Act 1945(Cth)

y Part5oftheCharteroftheUnitedNationsAct,totheextentthatitrelatestotheCharter of the United Nations (Sanctions—Al‑Qaida) Regulations 2008(Cth)

AdditionaloffencesareincludedfromNSWlegislation,specificallythoserelatedtocompliancewithinterimandextendedsupervisionordersunder:

y Section30oftheTerrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017 (NSW)

Indevelopingarobustmeasureofterrorismoffences,additionaloffenceswhichmightbeconsideredtobeterrorismrelatedwereidentified,andconvictionsundertheseoffencesinNSWwerealsoexamined.Ofalladditionaloffencesidentifiedforpotentialinclusion,nonehadbeenusedtoconvictanoffenderinNSW.

Descriptive statistics

Frequencycountsofterrorismoffenceswereexaminedbyoffencetype,andthecumulativefrequencyofprincipalterrorismoffencetypeswereexaminedbyyearofoffence.Inassessingthedegreetowhichterrorismoffendersspecialise,anyotherprovenoffences(i.e.non-terrorismoffences)werealsoconsidered.Terrorismoffendingasaproportionoftotaloffending,aswellasfrequencycountsofnon-terrorismoffending,wereexaminedbyAustralianandNewZealandClassificationofOffences(ANZSOC)divisioncategory(seeABS,2011).Terrorismoffenderswithnoprovenpriororconcurrentnon-terrorismoffenceswereclassifiedasspecialistterrorismoffendersforfurtheranalysis.

Thedemographicandcriminogeniccharacteristicsofoffendersconvictedofatleastoneterrorismoffencewerethenexaminedbywhetheranoffenderspecialisedinterrorismoffending.Demographiccharacteristicsincludedage,sex,Aboriginality,4socioeconomicdisadvantage,5andgeographicremoteness.6Criminogeniccharacteristicsincludedwhetheranoffenderhadanypriorcourtappearanceswithaprovenconvictionorprisonpenalty.RiskcategoriesandaveragescoresfromtheLevelofServiceInventory-Revised(LSI-R)7werealsoexamined.WhiletheLSI-Rhasnotbeenvalidatedforthepurposeofassessingre-offendinginaterrorismcontextandhasknownproblemsinpredictingcriminogenicneedsofterrorismoffenders(Pressman&Flockton,2014;Rafter,2018),itcapturesdescriptiveinformationaboutoffendersonfifty-fouritemsacrosstensubscales,including:

1. CriminalHistory

2. Education/Employment

3. Financial

4. Family/Marital

5. Accommodation

6. Leisure/Recreation

7. Companions

8. Alcohol/DrugProblem

9. Emotional/Personal

10.Attitudes/Orientation

4 ThestudyclassifiesanoffenderasanAboriginalpersoniftheywereeverrecordedasbeinganAboriginalpersonbytheNSWPoliceForce.5 SocioeconomicdisadvantageismeasuredusingtheSocio-EconomicIndicesforAreas(SEIFA)IndexofRelativeDisadvantage(seeAustralianBureauofStatistics[ABS],2016a).Foreaseofinterpretation,SEIFAscoresarebrokenintoquartilesreflectingrelativesocioeconomicdisadvantageinthepopulation.6 GeographicremotenessisorganisedintofivecategoriesusingtheAccessibilityandRemotenessIndexofAustralia(ARIA+),ameasurebasedonrelativeaccesstoservicesineacharea(seeABS,2016b).7 TheLSI-Risavalidatedriskassessmenttooldesignedtomeasurebothre-offendingriskassociatedwithgeneraloffending,andanindividual’scorrectionaltreatmentneedstoreducethisrisk(seeAndrews&Bonta,1995).



RESULTS

Terrorism offences

Table1showscountsofproventerrorismchargesbyoffencetype.Sincespecificterrorismoffenceswereintroducedin2002,therehavebeen72proventerrorismchargesfinalisedinNSW,involvingatotalof48uniqueoffendersacross49cases.Themajorityoftheseoffencesrelatetolegislationthathasenabledtheproactivepolicingandpreventionofterrorism-relatedactivities.Themostcommonoffencecategory,terrorismplanningoffences,comprisedapproximately39percentofallproventerrorismcharges.Thesecondlargestcategory,breachesofcontrolandsupervisionorders,comprisedafurther21percentofallproventerrorismcharges.Foreignincursionandrecruitmentoffencesaccountedfor6percentofallproventerrorismcharges,withthreequartersoftheseoffences(4percentoftotalproventerrorismcharges)beingoffencesrelatedtotheproactivepolicingofterrorism.Overall,36percentofproventerrorismchargesrepresentedoffencesthatwerecarriedoutbyoffenders(hereafter,enactedoffences),withthemajorityrelatingtothecollection,manufactureorpossessionofterrorismrelateditems(18percent).Fromtheinceptionofterrorism-specificlawsinAustralia,onlythreechargesrelatingtoaterroristacthavebeenfinalisedwithaguiltyoutcomeinNSWcriminalcourts.Thisrepresentsslightlymorethan4percentofallproventerrorismchargesinNSW.

Table 1. Proven terrorism offence charges by type

Terrorism offence typeNumber of

offencesNumber of offenders

Average offences per

offender

% of all terrorism offences

Planning offences 28 25 1.1 38.9

Control and supervision order offences 15 5 3.0 20.8

Collect/make/possess terrorism item offences 13 10 1.3 18.1

Terrorism financing offences 5 4 1.3 6.9

Foreign incursions and recruitment offences 4 4 1.0 5.6

Terrorist organisation offences 4 3 1.3 5.6

Terrorist act offences 3 3 1.0 4.2

Total 72 48 1.5 100.0Note.Frequenciescorrespondtothetotalnumberofprovencharges,withsomeoffendershavingbeenchargedwithmultipleoffences

inasinglecase.Assuch,countsinthecolumnlabellednumberofoffendersdonotsumtothetotalnumberofterrorismoffenders. Percentagecolumnsmaynotsumtothetotalduetoroundingerrors.

Principal terrorism offences

Figure1showsthefrequencydistributionofprovenprincipalterrorismoffencesbytype,andbywhethertheywererelatedtoeithertheproactivepolicingofterrorismortheprosecutionofanenactedoffence.Slightlymorethantwothirdsofallterrorismoffendershadaproactivepolicingoffenceastheirprincipalterrorismoffence,withoverhalfofthesebeingaplanningoffence.

Fifteenpeoplehavebeenconvictedofenactedterrorismoffencesastheirprincipaloffence,withnearlyhalfoftheseoffencesrelatingtothecollection,manufactureorpossessionofterrorismitems.AmoredetailedlistofallprovenprincipalterrorismoffencesandchargesispresentedinAppendixTableA1.



Proactive policing offences Enacted offences

Foreign incursions and recruitmentoffences (proactive policing)

Control and supervision order offences

Planning offences

Foreign incursions and recruitmentoffences (enacted)

Terrorism financing offences

Terrorist organisation offences

Terrorist act offences

Collect/make/possess terrorism itemoffences0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Num

ber o

f pr

inci

pal t

erro

rism

off

ence

sFigure 1. Proven terrorism offences by offence type

Penalties imposed for terrorism offences

Table2showsthepenaltiesimposedonoffendersincasesinvolvingaproventerrorismoffence.Ofthoseconvictedofterrorismoffences,94percent(n=46)receivedaprisonsentence,withamedianimprisonmentdurationof108months.Theremaining6percentreceivedacommunity-basedorder(i.e.,communitycorrectionorderwithsupervision,intensivecorrectionorder,orbondwithoutsupervision)withamedianorderdurationof48months.Totalimprisonmenttermsforterrorismoffenderswerewidelydistributedwithaninterquartilerange(IQR)of216months.

Table 2. Type of penalty received by offenders with a proven terrorism offenceNumber of offenders

receiving penalty type

Principal penalty value

(months)

Duration of total term for principal penalty

(months)

n % Median IQR Median IQR

Community-based sentencea 3 6.1 48 24

Imprisonment 46 93.9 108 160 144 216Note.Forprisonpenalties,theprincipalpenaltyvaluecorrespondstothenon-paroleperiod. aAcombinationofcommunitycorrectionorderswithsupervision,intensivecorrectionorders,andbondswithoutsupervision.

Terrorism offenders over time

Figure2showsthenumberofoffendersbytypeofprincipalterrorismoffenceandyearofoccurrence.8 Thetimingofterrorismchargesfordifferentdefendantsisstronglycorrelated.Thisisexpectedasmultipleterrorismoffendersareoftenproceededagainstsimultaneouslyaspartofaspecialpoliceoperation.Forexamplethespikeinoffenderscommittingterrorismoffencesin2005seeninFigure2coincideswithawell-knownanti-terrorismoperation,OperationPendennis(seeAustralianSecurityIntelligenceOrganisation[ASIO],2019).Priorto2014only13offendershadcommittedterrorismoffencesthatwerefinalisedinNSWcourts.

8 Whenconsideringthetimingofterrorismoffences,itisimportanttonotethatdatainthisstudyonlyrepresentterrorismoffencesthathavebeenfinalisedincourt.Itispossiblethattherearemorerecentterrorismoffences,yettobefinalised,thatarenotincludedinthestudy.AppendixFigureA1showsthecumulativefrequencydistributionofterrorismoffencecourtfinalisationsbythenumberofyearsbetweentheoffenceandcourtfinalisation.Halfofallterrorismoffenceswerefinalisedwithin3years,and94percentwerefinalisedwithin5years.



InAustralia,theFederalGovernmentcommunicatesthelikelihoodofanactofterrorismoccurringthroughtheNationalTerrorismThreatAdvisorySystem;afive-tierriskcategorisationthatbroadlyoutlinesexpectedrisk.In2014,thethreatlevelwasraisedfromthesecondtier“Possible”tothethirdtier“Probable”,beingdefinedasthelevelatwhichindividualsorgroupshavedevelopedbothanintentandcapabilitytoconductaterroristattackinAustralia(DepartmentofHomeAffairs,2020).Sincethethreatlevelwasraisedin2014,atleasttenmajorcounter-terrorismdisruptionoperationshavebeenruninNSW(ASIO,2019),withafurther35offenderscommittingterrorismoffencesthathavebeenfinalisedincourtduringthisperiod.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Num

ber o

f off

ence

s

Year of offence

Figure 2. Number of offenders with a proven terrorism offence by year

Foreign incursions and recruitment offences(enacted)

Terrorism financing offences


Terrorist act offences

Collect/make/possess terrorism item offences

Foreign incursions and recruitment offences(proactive policing)


Planning offences

Non-terrorism offending and specialisation by terrorism offenders

Table3showsthecountsofprovenpriorandconcurrentnon-terrorismchargesforoffenderswithatleastoneproventerrorismoffence,brokendownbyoffencetype.Numbersandpercentagesofoffenderscorrespondtothecombinedcountofpriorandconcurrentoffences.Onlyeightoffenders(17percent)hadprovenconcurrentnon-terrorismcharges,and27offenders(56percent)hadprovenpriornon-terrorismcharges.Whiletherewerealargevarietyofoffencescommittedbyterrorismoffenders,afewoffencecategoriesstandoutasparticularlycommon.Themostcommonnon-terrorismoffenceswereoffencesagainstjusticeprocedures,governmentsecurityandgovernmentoperations(28percentofallnon-terrorismoffences).Itisinterestingtonotethatwhilethelargenumberofoffencesofthistype(n=124)doesnotincludeterrorismoffences,thisistheANZSOCdivisionintowhichterrorismoffenceswouldotherwisebecategorised.Thenextmostcommonnon-terrorismoffencesweretheftandrelatedoffences(12percentofnon-terrorismoffences),closelyfollowedbyactsintendedtocauseinjury(11percentofnon-terrorismoffences).Notably,noterrorismoffendershadpriororconcurrentprovenchargesforsexualassaultandrelatedoffences.Ofthosewithanyprovenpriororconcurrentnon-terrorismoffences(n=28),theaveragenumberofnon-terrorismoffencesperpersonwas16offences.Non-terrorismoffencesaccountedforapproximately87percentofalloffencescommittedbyterrorismoffenders,withterrorismoffencesrepresentingtheremaining13percent.



Table 3. Non-terrorism offences by terrorism offenders

Offence type

Number of prior offences

Number of prior and

concurrent offences

Number of

offenders

Average number of non-terrorism offence type per

offender

Percentage of all

non-terrorism offences

Percentage of all offences committed

by terrorism offenders

Homicide and related offences 0 1 1 1.0 0.2 0.2

Acts intended to cause injury 49 50 12 4.2 11.2 9.7

Sexual assault and related offences 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Dangerous or negligent acts endangering persons 14 14 6 2.3 3.1 2.7

Abduction, harassment and other offences against the person 10 11 5 2.2 2.5 2.1

Robbery, extortion and related offences 20 20 7 2.9 4.5 3.9

Unlawful entry with intent/burglary, break and enter 28 28 3 9.3 6.3 5.5

Theft and related offences 52 52 10 5.2 11.7 10.1

Fraud, deception and related offences 5 6 5 1.2 1.4 1.2

Illicit drug offences 18 18 9 2.0 4.0 3.5

Prohibited and regulated weapons and explosives offences 26 31 10 3.1 7.0 6.0

Property damage and environmental pollution 24 24 5 4.8 5.4 4.7

Public order offences 36 37 10 3.7 8.3 7.2

Traffic and vehicle regulatory offences 28 28 9 3.1 6.3 5.5

Offences against justice procedures, government security and government operations 112 124 13 9.5 27.8 24.1

Miscellaneous offences 2 2 2 1.0 0.5 0.4

Total a 424 446 28 15.9 100.0 86.8Note.Priorandconcurrentchargesrelatetothefirstterrorismoffencecommittedbyterrorismoffenders.

Numbersandpercentagesofoffenderscorrespondtothecombinedcountofpriorandconcurrentoffences. Percentagecolumnsmaynotsumtototalduetorounding. Offenderfrequenciescorrespondtothetotalnumberofprovencharges,withsomeoffendershavingbeenchargedwithmultipletypesofoffence. Assuch,countsinthenumberofoffenderscolumndonotsumtothetotalnumberofterrorismoffenders.

aTotalnumberofoffendersandaveragenumberofnon-terrorismoffencesperoffenderrelatetothenumberofoffenderswithanyprovennon-terrorism offences.

Giventhatoffencesagainstjusticeprocedures,governmentsecurityandgovernmentoperationsrepresentalargeproportion(28percent)ofallnon-terrorismoffendingbyterrorismoffenders,thisoffencetypeisinvestigatedfurthertoprovideamorecomprehensiveviewofnon-terrorismoffendingbyterrorismoffenders.Table4presentsthecountofoffencesagainstjusticeprocedures,governmentsecurityandgovernmentoperationsbytheANZSOCgroupassociatedwitheachoffence.Thisbreakdownisshownseparatelyforprioroffencesonly,andforpriorandconcurrentoffencescombined.Roughlyonethirdofnon-terrorismoffencesofthistypewereoffencesagainstjusticeproceduresnotelsewhereclassified.9Thiswascloselyfollowedbybreachofbond–probationoffences,whichrepresentedslightlyoveronequarterofnon-terrorismoffencesagainstjusticeprocedures,governmentsecurityandgovernmentoperations.

9 ThisANZSOCgroupincludesoffencessuchas:accessoryafterthefact;misprision(concealingknowledge)offelony;contemptofcourt,notinvolvingtheperversionofjusticeproceedings;makefalsereporttopolice;andfailtoappearbeforecourt.



Table 4. Offences against justice procedures, government security and government operations committed by offenders charged with a terrorism offence

Number of prior offences

Number of prior and concurrent offences

n % n %

Breach of bond - other 18 16.1 18 14.5

Breach of bond - probation 31 27.7 38 30.7

Breach of violence order 2 1.8 2 1.6

Offences against justice procedures, nec 39 34.8 40 32.3

Prison regulation offences 1 0.9 1 0.8

Resist or hinder police officer or justice official 17 15.2 20 16.1

Subvert the course of justice 0 0.0 1 0.8

Other a 4 3.6 4 3.2

Total 112 100.0 124 100.0Note.Priorandconcurrentchargesrelatetothefirstterrorismoffencecommittedbyterrorismoffenders.aAcombinationofbreachesofcommunityserviceorders,community-basedorders,andsuspendedsentences.

Byconsideringtheproportionofeachoffender’stotalprovenchargesthatareterrorismoffences,itispossibletogaugethedegreetowhicheachoffenderspecialisesinterrorismoffending.Table5describesthenumberofproventerrorismandnon-terrorismchargescommittedbyterrorismoffenders,accordingtotheextentofspecialisation.Thefirstcolumnseparatesoffendersintogroups,basedonthepercentageoftheirtotaloffenceswhichareterrorismoffences.Thesecondandthirdcolumnsdescribethenumberandpercentageofallterrorismoffendersineachgroup,respectively.Thefourth,fifthandsixthcolumnsrespectivelydescribetheaveragenumberoftotal,terrorism,andnon-terrorismoffencescommittedbyoffendersineachcategory.Theremainingcolumnsdescribethefrequencyoftotal,terrorismandnon-terrorismoffencescommittedbyoffendersineachcategory.Focusingonthethirdcolumn,42percentofallterrorismoffenders(n=20)wouldmeetourdefinitionforspecialisinginterrorismoffending,havingnoprovenpriororconcurrentchargesfornon-terrorismoffences.Thisgroupisresponsibleforatotalof27terrorismoffences,representingslightlymorethanoneoffenceperoffender.Conversely,19percentofallterrorismoffenders(n=9)haveterrorismchargesrepresentinglessthan10percentoftheirtotalprovenoffences.Thisgroupmightbeconsideredmoregeneraloffenders.Theseoffendershadthelargestnumberofoffencesofanysub-group,andwereresponsibleforanaverageof43offenceseach,42ofwhichwerenon-terrorismoffences.

Table 5. Offending frequency by percentage of terrorism offences in criminal career

% of offences in career that are terrorism offences

Number of offenders

% of all terrorism offenders

Average number of offences

Average number of terrorism offences

committed

Average number of

non-terrorism offences

committedTotal

offences

Total terrorism offences

committed

Total non-terrorism

offences committed

0-9.9% 9 18.8 43.4 1.0 42.4 391 9 382

10-24.9% 6 12.5 7.0 1.0 6.0 42 6 36

25-49.9% 5 10.4 3.8 1.0 2.8 19 5 14

50-84.9% 8 16.7 4.4 2.6 1.8 35 21 14

85-99.9% 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

100% 20 41.7 1.4 1.4 0.0 27 27 0Note.Priorandconcurrentoffencesrelatetothefirstterrorismoffencecommittedbyterrorismoffenders.



Demographic and criminogenic characteristics of offenders

Table6showsthefrequencydistributionofdemographicandcriminogeniccharacteristicsofterrorismoffendersbywhethertheyspecialisedinterrorismoffending.TerrorismoffendersinNSWwerelargelysimilarintheirdemographiccomposition:96percentweremale,90percentwerenon-Aboriginal,mostresidedinamajorcity,andthemajoritylivedinanareaassociatedwiththehighestlevelofsocioeconomicdisadvantageatthetimeofoffence.Overhalfofallterrorismoffendershadatleastonepriorcourtappearancewithaprovenconviction,andonequarterhadpreviouslyreceivedaprisonpenalty.Themedianageofterrorismoffendersatthetimeofcourtfinalisationwas26years.Agewasweaklyrelatedtowhetheranoffenderwasaspecialistterrorismoffender,withtheagedistributionforspecialistterrorismoffendersskewingslightlyolder.Whileonly4percent(n=2)ofallterrorismoffenderswerefemale,femaleoffenderscomprised5percentofallspecialistterrorismoffenders(n=1).

Ofthe48offenderswithaproventerrorismoffenceinNSW,77percent(n=37)hadavalidLSI-Rscorerecorded.Table7showsthefrequencydistributionofLSI-Rriskcategoriesfortheseoffendersbywhethertheyspecialisedinterrorismoffending.Inlinewithconcernsaboutthevalidityandusefulnessofthetoolformeasuringre-offendingriskinthecontextofterrorismoffending(Pressman&Flockton,2014;Rafter,2018),themajorityofterrorismoffenderswithavalidLSI-Rscore(84percent)wereratedashavingalowtomediumriskofre-offending.

Whilethere-offendingriskmeasurefromtheLSI-Rmaynotbeaccuratewhenassessingthelikelihoodofterrorismoffending,LSI-RsubscalescoresprovidedescriptiveandcontextualinformationregardingthecriminogenicriskprofileofterrorismoffendersinNSW.Table8describestheaverageLSI-Rsubscaleandtotalscoresofterrorismoffendersbywhethertheyspecialisedinterrorismoffending.AhigherLSI-Rscoreisrelatedtoahigherriskofgeneralre-offending.TheaverageterrorismoffenderhadatotalLSI-Rscoreof25,interpretedasamediumriskscoreontheLSI-Rscale.Averagesubscalescoresforterrorismoffendersasagroupsuggestthattheyhavedisplayedlowre-offendingriskintermsofcharacteristicsrelatedtotheirfamilyandmaritalbackground,alcoholanddruguse,andbothemotionalandpersonalcharacteristics.Whilesmallsamplesizeprecludesformalstatisticaltestsofdifference,aninformalcomparisonofmeansubscalescoressuggeststhatspecialistterrorismoffendershavedisplayedaquitedifferentsetofriskcharacteristics.Overall,specialistterrorismoffendershadameanLSI-Rscoreapproximately20percentlowerthannon-specialistterrorismoffenders.Asexpected,thisdifferenceislargelydrivenbydifferencesinthecriminalhistorysubscalescoreasspecialistterrorismoffendershadnopriorprovengeneraloffencesrecorded.Differencesintheaveragecriminalhistorysubscalescoreaccountfor2.6,ornearly45percent,ofthe5.9differenceintotalLSI-Rscorebetweenspecialistandnon-specialistterrorismoffenders.Beyondthisexpecteddifference,averagescoresforspecialistterrorismoffenderswerealsolowerornearequalacrossalltenLSI-Rsubscaledomains.Afteraccountingforaveragedifferencesbetweenspecialistandnon-specialistterrorismoffendersinthecriminalhistorysubscale,thelargestdifferencesweredrivenbythesubscalescoresforalcoholanddruguse(29percentofthedifference),emotional/personal(20percentofthedifference),educationandemployment(5percentofthedifference),andtypeofcompanions(3percentofthedifference).



Table 6. Demographic and criminogenic characteristics of terrorism offenders by specialisation status

Non-specialist terrorism

offendersSpecialist terrorism

offenders Total

n % n % n %

N 28 100.0 20 100.0 48 100.0

Sex Female 1 3.6 1 5.0 2 4.2

Male 27 96.4 19 95.0 46 95.8

Age 10-17 1 3.6 0 0.0 1 2.1

18-29 21 75.0 13 65.0 34 70.8

30-39 2 7.1 5 25.0 7 14.6

40+ 4 14.3 2 10.0 6 12.5

Socio-economic disadvantage

Quartile 1 15 53.6 11 55.0 26 54.2

(Most disadvantaged)

Quartile 2 3 10.7 1 5.0 4 8.3

Quartile 3 4 14.3 0 0.0 4 8.3

Quartile 4 1 3.6 2 10.0 3 6.3

(Least disadvantaged)

Missing 5 17.9 6 30.0 11 22.9

Remoteness a Major cities 21 75.0 14 70.0 35 72.9

Inner or outer regional 2 7.1 0 0.0 2 4.2

Missing 5 17.9 6 30.0 11 22.9

Aboriginality Aboriginal 3 10.7 0 0.0 3 6.3

Non-Aboriginal 24 85.7 19 95.0 43 89.6

Missing 1 3.6 1 5.0 2 4.2

Prior court appearances

None 1 3.6 20 100.0 21 43.8

One 9 32.1 0 0.0 9 18.8

Two or more 18 64.3 0 0.0 18 37.5

Prior prison penaltiesb

None 16 57.1 20 100.0 36 75.0

One 6 21.4 0 0.0 6 12.5

Two or more 6 21.4 0 0.0 6 12.5Note.aNooffenderswerefoundtohaveresidedinremoteorveryremoteareas.

bIncludingjuvenilecontrolorders.

Table 7. LSI-R risk categories by specialisation status

Non-specialist terrorism

offendersSpecialist terrorism

offenders Total

n % n % n %

Valid LSI-R score 24 100.0 13 100.0 37 100.0

LSI-R risk category < Medium 9 37.5 7 53.8 16 43.2

Medium 9 37.5 6 46.2 15 40.5

> Medium 6 25.0 0 0.0 6 16.2



Table 8. Average LSI-R subscale scores by specialisation status

Non-specialist

terrorism offendersSpecialist terrorism

offenders Total

mean mean mean

LSI-R subscale scores Criminal history (0-10) 5.4 2.8 4.5

Education/ employment (0-10) 6.1 5.8 6.0

Financial (0-2) 1.0 0.9 1.0

Family/ marital (0-4) 1.4 1.6 1.5

Accommodation (0-3) 1.3 1.4 1.4

Leisure/ recreation (0-2) 1.8 1.7 1.7

Companions (0-4) 2.5 2.3 2.5

Alcohol/ drugs (0-9) 2.3 0.6 1.7

Emotional/ personal (0-5) 2.3 1.1 1.8

Attitudes/ orientation (0-4) 2.9 2.8 2.9

LSI-R score Overall score (0-54) 27.0 21.1 24.9

Note.Numbersinbracketsrefertothepossiblerangeofeachscore.

DISCUSSIONThepurposeofthisbriefwastoanswerthreequestions:

1. Howmany,andwhattypeof,terrorismoffenceshavebeenfinalisedinNSWcriminalcourtssincetheintroductionofspecificoffencestocriminaliseterrorismin2002?

2. HowmanyoffendershavebeenchargedwithaterrorismoffenceinNSW?Whatarethedemographicandcriminogeniccharacteristicsoftheseoffenders?

3. Towhatdegreeareterrorismoffendersspecialists?Whattypesofnon-terrorismoffencesarecommittedbyterrorismoffenders?

SincetheintroductionofspecificoffencestocriminaliseterrorisminJuly2002,therehavebeen72proventerrorismchargesfinalisedinNSW,involvingatotalof48offenders.Themajorityoftheseoffencesrelatetolegislationthathasallowedproactiveandpreventativepolicingofterrorism-relatedactivities.Focusingonoffenders’principaloffences,theanalysisshowedthat52percentofallterrorismoffenders(n=25)wereconvictedofplanningoffences,11percent(n=5)wereconvictedofcontrolandsupervisionorderoffences,and6percent(n=3)wereconvictedofforeignincursionsandrecruitmentoffencesrelatedtotheproactivepolicingofterrorism.Theremaining31percentofoffenders(n=15)wereconvictedofenactedterrorismoffences.Theseincludedoffencesrelatingtothecollection,manufactureandpossessionofterrorismitems(15percent,n=7),terroristactoffences(6percent,n=3),terroristorganisationoffences(6percent,n=3),terrorismfinancingoffences(2percent,n=1),andenactedforeignincursionsandrecruitmentoffences(2percentn=1).ThemajorityoftheseterrorismoffenceswerefinalisedinNSWcourtswithinthelastsixyears;coincidingwiththeFederalGovernmentraisingtheNationalTerrorismThreatto“Probable”in2014.

InlinewithexistingAustralianevidence(Shanahan,2020;VictoriaPolice,2018),terrorismoffendersinNSWareahomogenousgroupintermsoftheirobservabledemographiccharacteristics.Theaverageterrorismoffendercouldbedescribedasanon-Aboriginalmale,agedbetween18and30yearsatthetimeofcourtfinalisation,fromamajorcity,andpredominantlyfromanareaofsocioeconomicdisadvantage.Despitethestrongdemographicsimilaritiesbetweenterrorismoffenders,itisimportanttorecognisethatnotableoutliersexist.Forexample,whilethemajorityofterrorismoffenderswerefromanareaassociatedwiththehighestlevelofsocioeconomicdisadvantage(54percent),someoffenderswerefromareasassociatedwiththelowestlevelofsocioeconomicdisadvantage.



Despitebeingbroadlysimilarintermsoftheirobserveddemographiccharacteristics,ouranalysissuggeststhattherearesignificantdifferenceswithregardtopriorcontactwiththecriminaljusticesystemandotherriskfactorsassociatedwithgeneraloffending.Over40percentofterrorismoffendersinoursample(n=20)couldbeconsideredspecialists,havingnoprovenpriororconcurrentchargesfornon-terrorismoffences.Conversely,for19percentofalloffendersinoursample(n=9)terrorismchargesrepresentedlessthan10percentoftheircriminalconvictions.FurtherexaminationoftheaverageLSI-Rsubscalescoresforthespecialistoffendergroupsuggeststhattheymayhavedifferentriskprofilestothosewhohavecommittedothernon-terrorismrelatedoffences;scoringloweronseveraldomainsincludingalcoholanddruguse,employmentandeducation,andemotional/personal.Whilethisresultprovidessomesupportforthenotionthataproportionofterrorismoffenderscanbeconsideredasadistinctgroupwithcriminogenicneedsandmotivesthatdifferfrommoregeneraloffenders,furtherresearchisclearlyneeded.Amorecompleteunderstandingofthedegreetowhichterrorismoffendersspecialiseisparticularlyimportantforthedesignofprogramsorinterventionsaimedatreducingterrorismoffendingaswellasforthedevelopmentofvalidriskassessmenttools.

ThisbriefhasprovidednewdataonthenumberandbackgroundofoffendersfoundguiltyofterrorismoffencesinNSW.Therearehoweverkeylimitationsofthisresearchwhichpreventtheextrapolationoftheresultstoterrorismoffendersasawhole.Mostnotably,whileterrorismoffendingandtheoperation/structureofcounter-terrorismagenciescrossjurisdictionalboundaries,thecurrentstudyislimitedtoprovencasesofterrorismfinalisedinNSWcourts.ThismeansthatwehavebeenunabletocapturethefullextentofterrorismoffendinginAustralia,orindeedinNSW,asonlyoffencesthathavebeensuccessfullyprosecutedinthisjurisdictionareincludedhere.Acknowledgingtheselimitations,andinlinewiththerepeatedcallforroutinegovernmentreportingonterrorismoffending(INSLM,2020),furtherworkutilisingdataatanationallevelisneededtoquantifythecross-jurisdictionaluseofspecificterrorismoffencestoconvictoffenders,andtoexaminethedemographicandcriminogeniccharacteristicsofoffenderswhohavebeenconvictedofterrorismoffences.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSTheauthorwouldliketothankcolleaguesfromTheOfficeofCommunitySafetyandCohesionandtheCommunityProtectionteamwithintheLegalDepartmentoftheDepartmentofCommunitiesandJustice,particularlyNatashaO’Farrell,EmmaCutmoreandPhoebeZhou,fortheirguidanceandassistanceincompilingalistofterrorismrelatedoffencesforthereport.TheauthorwouldalsoliketothankcolleaguesatBOCSAR,particularlyClareRingland,SuzannePoyntonandEvarnOoi,fortheircommentsondraftsofthereport,andFlorenceSinfordesktoppublishingthebrief.



REFERENCESAndrews,D.A.,&Bonta,J.(1995).The Level of Service Inventory‑Revised.Toronto:Multi-HealthSystems.

AustralianBureauofStatistics(ABS).(2011).Australian and New Zealand Standard Offence Classification (ANZSOC) (cat.no.1216.0).Retrieved24August2020fromhttp://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/1234.0

AustralianBureauofStatistics(ABS).(2016a).Census of Population and Housing: Socio‑Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA), Australia, 2016 (cat.no.2033.0.55.001).Retrieved24August2020fromhttps://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/subscriber.nsf/0/756EE3DBEFA869EFCA258259000BA746/$File/SEIFA%202016%20Technical%20Paper.pdf

AustralianBureauofStatistics(ABS).(2016b).Australian Standard Geographical Classification (ASGC) (cat.no.1216.0).Retrieved24August2020fromhttps://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/1270.0.55.005?OpenDocument

AustralianSecurityIntelligenceOrganisation(ASIO).(2019).ASIO annual report 2018–19: Part 3. Australia’s security environment and outlook.Retrieved24August2020fromhttps://www.asio.gov.au/sites/default/files/2018-19%20Annual%20Report%20WEB2.pdf

DepartmentofHomeAffairs.(2020).National Terrorism Threat Advisory System.Retrieved24August2020fromhttps://www.nationalsecurity.gov.au/Securityandyourcommunity/Pages/National-Terrorism-Threat-Advisory-System.aspx

Dugan,L.,&Distler,M.(2016).PartIV.Researchmethods:Measuringterrorism.InG.LaFree,&J.D.Freilich(Eds.),The handbook of the criminology of terrorism(pp.187-205).WestSussex:Wiley.

Harris-Hogan,S.(2020).Howtoevaluateaprogramworkingwithterrorists?UnderstandingAustralia’scounteringviolentextremismearlyinterventionprogram.Journal of Policing, Intelligence and Counter Terrorism, 15(2),97-116.

IndependentNationalSecurityLegislationMonitor(INSLM).(2020).Annual report 2018‑2019.Retrieved24August2020fromhttps://www.inslm.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-02/INSLM%20Annual%20Report%20-%202018-2019.pdf

Lum,C.,Kennedy,L.W.,&Sherley,A.(2006).Arecounter-terrorismstrategieseffective?TheresultsoftheCampbellsystematicreviewoncounter-terrorismevaluationresearch.Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2(4),489-516.

MacKinnell,I.,Poletti,P.,&Holmes,M.(2010).Measuring offence seriousness(CrimeandJusticeBulletinNo.118).Retrieved24August2020fromNSWBureauofCrimeStatisticsandResearchwebsite:https://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Publications/CJB/cjb142.pdf

McCulloch,J.&Pickering,S.(2010).Part2.Counter-terrorism:Thelawandpolicingofpre-emption.InN.McGarrity,A.Lynch,&G.Williams(Eds.),Counter‑terrorism and beyond: The culture of law and justice after 9/11(pp.13-29).NewYork:Routledge.

McGarrity,N.,&Blackbourn,J.(2019,September30).Australiahasenacted82anti-terrorlawssince2001.Buttoughlawsalonecan’teliminateterrorism.The Conversation.Retrieved24August2020fromhttps://theconversation.com/australia-has-enacted-82-anti-terror-laws-since-2001-but-tough-laws-alone-cant-eliminate-terrorism-123521

Pressman,E.,&Flockton,J.(2014).Violentextremistriskassessment:IssuesandapplicationsoftheVERA-2inahigh-securitycorrectionalsetting.InA.Silke(Ed.),Prisons, terrorism and extremism: Critical issues in management, radicalisation and reform (pp.273-316).Abingdon:Routledge.



Rafter,F.(2018).The management of radicalised inmates in NSW.Retrieved24August2020fromhttp://www.custodialinspector.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/The%20management%20of%20radicalised%20inmates%20in%20NSW.pdf

Roach,K.(2011).Australiaresponds:Hyper-legislation.InThe 9/11 effect: Comparative counter‑terrorism (pp. 309‑360). Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

RTIInternational(RTI).(2017).Countering violent extremism: The use of assessment tools for measuring violence risk: Literature review.Retrieved24August2020fromhttps://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/OPSR_TP_CVE-Use-Assessment-Tools-Measuring-Violence-Risk_Literature-Review_March2017-508.pdf

Ruddock,P.(2007).Lawasapreventativeweaponagainstterrorism.InA.Lynch,G.Williams,&E.MacDonald(Eds.),Law and liberty in the war on terror (pp.3-8).Sydney:FederationPress.

Schuurman,B.(2018).Researchonterrorism,2007-2016:Areviewofdata,methodsandauthorship.Terrorism and Political Violence, 32(5),1011-1026.

Shanahan,R.(2020).Typologyofterror:ThebackgroundsofAustralianJihadis.Australasian Policing, 12(1),32-38.

Smith,C.,&Nolan,M.(2016).Post-sentencecontinueddetentionofhigh-riskterroristoffendersinAustralia.Criminal Law Journal, 40(3),163-179.

VictoriaPolice.(2018).Appendix B, Counter Terrorism Strategy 2018‑2021.Retrieved24August2020fromhttps://www.police.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-01/201821VicPolCounterTerrorismStrategy.pdf

SupremeCourtofVictoria.(2020).Glossary of legal terms.Retrieved24August2020fromhttps://www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au/about-the-court/glossary-of-legal-terms

Williams,G.(2011).AdecadeofAustraliananti-terrorlaws.Melbourne University Law Review, 35(3), 1136-1176.


NSW BUREAU OF CRIME STATISTICS AND RESEARCH - LEVEL 1, HENRY DEANE BUILDING, 20 LEE STREET, SYDNEY [email protected] • www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au • Ph: (02) 8346 1100 • Fax: (02) 8346 1298 • ISBN 978-1-925343-95-3

© State of New South Wales through the Department of Communities and Justice 2021. You may copy, distribute, display, download and otherwise freely deal with this work for any purpose, provided that you attribute the Department of Justice as the owner. However, you must obtain permission if you wish to (a) charge others

for access to the work (other than at cost), (b) include the work in advertising or a product for sale, or (c) modify the work.

Figure A1. Time between offence and court finalisation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Perc

ent o

f ter

rori

sm off

ence

s fina

lisae

d

Years

APPENDIX Table A1. Terrorism offence frequency and groupings

Offence group 1

Offence group 2 Offence description

Law part code

Number of proven charges

Number of proven principal terrorism

offences

Enacted offences

Collect/make/possess terrorism item offences

Knowingly possess thing connected with terrorism 51390 5 1

Recklessly possess thing connected with terrorism 51391 1 1

Knowingly collect/ make document connected with terrorism

51409 7 5

Terrorist act offences Commit terrorist act 51385 3 3

Terrorist financing offences

Knowingly make funds available to terrorist organisation

58898 4 0

Recklessly make funds available to terrorist organisation

58901 1 1


Knowingly be member of terrorist organisation 51414 1 1

Knowingly give support/ resources to terrorist organisation

51425 3 2

Foreign incursions and recruitment offences

Engage in hostile activity in foreign country 85236 1 1

Proactive policing offences

Prepare to engage in commission of offence against s 119.1

85238 2 2

Give/ receive goods/ services to promote s 119.1 offence

85242 1 1


Contravene control order 58911 8 2

Fail to comply with extended supervision order 91744 4 1

Fail to comply with interim supervision order 91745 3 3

Planning offences Do act in preparation/ planning for terrorist act 51411 28 25

Note.Offencesareincludediftheycorrespondtoatleastoneprovencharge.