of the disaster and conduct a criminal investigation. the Passports Act was amended to give Australian authorities, such as the Australian Federal Police or the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO), the power to request an order for the surrender of a person's foreign passport. the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act was amended to give ASIO the power to demand a person surrender their Australian and foreign passports if the person is subject to a request for consent to apply for a questioning warrant. the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 was amended to make decisions of the Attorney-General on security grounds exempt from the application of the Act. The Bill passed Parliament and was assented to on 16 August 2004 as the Anti-terrorism Act (No. 2) 2004. Anti-terrorism Bill (No 3) 2004 Ruddock introduced the Anti-terrorism Bill (No 3) 2004 on 24 June which reintroduced the provisions of the Anti-terrorism Bill (No 2), 2004, relating to the amendment of Part 1D of the Crimes Act, the Passports Act and Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act (described above), which had been separated from that Bill at the request of the Opposition to allow a speedy passage of these non-controversial sections of the Bill. The Bill was supported by the Opposition and was passed by the House of Representatives on 24 June without opposition. The Bill was then referred to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Committee and was debated in the Senate after the Committee reported. The Bill passed Parliament and was assented to on 16 August 2004 as the Anti-terrorism Act (No. 3) 2004. Criticisms of the legislation The Australian Democrats and the Australian Greens opposed the bills on the grounds that they unacceptably abridged the rights of persons and organisations. Some civil liberties organisations also opposed all or parts of the bills. The Castan Centre for Human Rights Law at Monash University said: "No evidence is offered to support this claim that the investigation of terrorist offences is sufficiently complex as to warrant a doubling of the total permitted time of detention from 12 to 24 hours. Indeed, given the breadth of the definition of 'terrorism offences', it is difficult to see how such evidence could be produced. The potential subject matters of investigation are simply too varied." The New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties said: "The Council is in general concerned about any extension of the power to detain