[LINK] OT: Howards anti-terrorist mailout

Adam Todd at@ah.net
Tue, 11 Feb 2003 15:04:43 +1100


> > Look at the Dept of Foreign Affairs, Downer embarrassed by the leaking 
> of a
> > document and now every staff member will be required to sign a statutory
> > declaration.  I hope they all refuse and stand their grounds of an OPEN 
> AND
> > PUBLIC government.
>
>I doubt that a stat dec sworn under duress would stand up anywhere, so
>they should go right ahead and swear it out as being less worth than the
>paper it's written on.

Actually Government agencies have a new slant on that.  Knowing that you 
maybe required to sign a document, agree to an undertaking or carry out an 
action as part of your job, whether under duress at the time of the 
"action" itself, is irrelevant and thus is no longer considered DURESS.

You can only, by recent precedent, be UNDER DURESS if you were not aware, 
at all, or could not have possibly been made to be aware, that you may be 
required to undertake or sign a document.  So if you are told more than the 
INSTANT you are required to do the action, you can no longer be under duress.

It's already been set in the Supreme and Federal Courts.