Abstract
[Extract]
Australia is known as a desirable place to live. It has the freedoms most associate with a Western democracy. But Australian state and territory governments are moving toward criminal association or consorting laws as a means of crime management, particularly in relation to organised crime.
Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia have introduced these restrictive laws. But are the laws justified? Are they an efficient and effective way to combat organised crime?
Australia is known as a desirable place to live. It has the freedoms most associate with a Western democracy. But Australian state and territory governments are moving toward criminal association or consorting laws as a means of crime management, particularly in relation to organised crime.
Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia have introduced these restrictive laws. But are the laws justified? Are they an efficient and effective way to combat organised crime?
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | The Conversation |
| Publication status | Published - 8 Feb 2016 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Criminalising conversations: Australia’s damaging love affair with consorting laws'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver