Law Court Security !

When the First Fleet arrived here in 1788 it was English law that was applied to maintaining order in this new colony.  Since Federation, Australian law has been added to that base and many new protocols have been applied to our court system.   In the higher courts, barristers, counsel and judges wear wigs and robes that hark back to the court system that prevailed in earlier centuries.

Trying a person in a law court is supposed to be a very civilized affair.  The basic contention that a person is " innocent until proved guilty " applies.  It is expected that if the person is a prisoner he or she will be allowed to wear clothing of their choice.  A remand prisoner would not be presented to a court wearing prison greens for fear of this infringing impartiality.  It is expected that any person charged with a crime will have access to defence representation.

Our system is very different to that of other countries.  Television viewers would have noted that the three Al Jazeera journalists tried in an Egyptian court were housed in a metal cage like wild animals and that they were forced to wear demeaning prison clothing.  Australian courts bend over backwards to present an air of civility.  Part of that protocol requires those police attending court to shed their firearms and remain unarmed.

We are now encountering a very different era.  The waging of religious war both overseas and on home soil has brought a huge increase in violence and the emergence of bikie gangs vying for profit from the drug culture has increased criminality that is evident in gun crime in our suburbs.  The law courts are no longer isolated from this trend.

When an accused jihadist or a bikie gang member appears in court to answer charges it is not unusual for the spectator section to be packed with supporters - many of whom threaten violence if the finding of the court is not to their liking.  Most of our courts now process those entering through security screens which are supposed to detect concealed weapons, but the world of technology is fast overtaking this protection.   3D Printing can produce a plastic pistol which will pass such a screening and the police are concerned at the development of credit card style blades which would be lethal in the hands of a violent person.   There are calls for the protocol to be overturned and for armed police to be allowed into the court system.

What brought this to a head was a recent incident when police gained intelligence that a revenge attack was planned when a criminal made a court appearance.  Heavily armed police surrounded the court, supported by the Bearcat light tank and police helicopters, but it was reaslised that even in an emergency they were not allowed to actually enter the courthouse - armed !   Fortunately, this attack failed to materialise - but it delivers a chilling warning.

The door is wide open for a Lindt Cafe style siege unless we increase court security.  At the very least, armed police must be allowed to enter courthouses to respond to violence and the presence of armed police in close proximity to the court room would be a wise precaution.   This would not extend to police in uniform called to the witness box to give evidence because arms openly carried in such an instance could create impartiality in some minds.  It is all a matter of balance.

We live in a changing world and new threats need new solutions.  Unfortunately, a sensible compromise will probably become a political issue !