Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:C2024C00749:section:46:p5
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:C2024C00749
Segment Type: section
Provision Reference: s 46 (pt 5/9)
Character Range: 279400–282026

using, or is likely to use, the service; and
 (d) the person is a terrorist offender in relation to whom an application for a post‑sentence order could be made; and
 (e) the person is detained in custody in a prison; and
 (f) there are reasonable grounds to suspect that there is an appreciable risk of the person committing a serious Part 5.3 offence; and
 (g) consideration is being given, will be given, or is likely to be given, by the AFP Minister (or a person on behalf of the AFP Minister), as to whether to apply for a post‑sentence order in relation to the person; and
 (h) information that would be likely to be obtained by intercepting under a warrant communications made to or from the service would be likely to assist in determining whether to apply for the post‑sentence order; and
 (i) having regard to the matters referred to in subsection (8), and to no other matters, the Judge or nominated ART member should issue a warrant authorising such communications to be intercepted;
the Judge or nominated ART member may, in the Judge's or member's discretion, issue such a warrant.
 (8) For the purposes of subsection (7), the matters to which the Judge or nominated ART member must have regard are:
 (a) how much the privacy of any person or persons would be likely to be interfered with by intercepting under a warrant communications made to or from the service referred to in subsection (7); and
 (b) how much the information referred to in paragraph (7)(h) would be likely to assist in determining whether to apply for the post‑sentence order; and
 (c) to what extent methods of determining whether to apply for the post‑sentence order that do not involve so intercepting communications have been used by, or are available to, the AFP Minister (or a legal representative of the AFP Minister); and
 (d) how much the use of such methods would be likely to assist in determining whether to apply for the post‑sentence order; and
 (e) how much the use of such methods would be likely to prejudice determining whether to apply for the post‑sentence order, whether because of delay or for any other reason; and
 (f) in relation to an application by an interception agency of Victoria—any submissions made by the Victorian PIM under section 44A to the Judge or nominated ART member; and
 (g) in relation to an application by an interception agency of Queensland—any submissions made by the Queensland PIM under section 45 to the Judge or nominated ART member.

Warrant sought for community safety supervision order
 (9) If a Part 9.10 warrant agency applies to an eligible Judge or nominated ART member for a warrant