January 16, 2025
Government programs get mixed results Deradicalisation programs have failed to change the behaviour of individuals authorities fear could commit acts of terror in Australia or to produce data on whether the initiatives actually work.
An evaluation obtained by the Herald Sun through Freedom of Information found the behaviour of some individuals actually worsened in the programs, triggering the involvement of law enforcement.
The Australian Institute of Criminology identified problem behaviour as doing crimes, viewing or producing extreme material or talking positively about extremist violence.
"There are positive signs of attitudinal change among young people with extremist views, but mixed evidence in relation to changes in behaviour and how these attitudes had manifested," the report said.
The revelations come after the Herald Sun last month revealed notorious convicted terrorist Abdul Nacer Benbrika remained radicalised two decades after he plotted bomb attacks at the MCG and Crown casino despite undergoing government-paid deradicalisation programs.
A Supreme Court of Victoria hearing where an interim order was put in place in December heard Benbrika had "not completely rejected ISIS ideology" and remained "radicalised but not dangerous".
The interim order was extended for another 28 days in the Supreme Court on Tuesday while Benbrika's lawyers prepare to fight to have all conditions on him lifted at a fourday hearing in March.
The AIC report is the only assessment of whether the Living Safe Together Intervention Program actually works for the Department of Home Affairs.
The report said "robust assessment data" on the success or failings of the program was unavailable while the relative infancy of the program meant it was impossible to assess its long-term effectiveness.
"While these data are anecdotal, they do provide some preliminary evidence as to the changes that have occurred in the lives of (primarily young) people who have engaged in the intervention program," the report said.
Opposition spokesman James Paterson said the threat of a terror attack in Australia meant the government needed tools to protect the public.
"If Home Affairs is not confident deradicalisation programs are working then the government must apply for post-sentence restrictions on released terrorist offenders," he said.
"Continuing detention orders are appropriate for the highest risk offenders, and extended supervision orders should be a priority for everyone else released into the community who still poses a risk."
The present approach focuses on intervention through community integration and participation by building highrisk individuals' "social and emotional resilience" to radical ideologies while exposing them to positive influences.
The AIC found that the program had positively changed the behaviour of some individuals and achieved modest improvements for participants in mental health, community and social engagement, and employment and education.
Some high-risk individuals, particularly those radicalised by Islamic ideologies, changed their attitudes towards the use of violence and learnt to accept different lifestyles and views as part of life in a diverse society.
"A small number of clients reported a shift from wanting to die for their beliefs to now believing they did have something to live for," the report said.
A Home Affairs spokesman said the best way to protect Australia was through early intervention, and the program offered support, referrals and diversion to those who were at risk or had been radicalised.
