Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (Statement of Procedures) Instrument 2025

This instrument, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (Statement of Procedures) Instrument 2025, prescribes procedural rules ASIO must follow when executing questioning warrants under the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979. It commences on the day it is approved (s2(1)) and expressly revokes and replaces the 2020 Statement of Procedures (s2(2)). The instrument is made under s34AF of the Act (s3), and so operates as administrative, not primary, legislation: it binds the Organisation in its execution of warrant-based questioning powers and sets internal minimum standards and reporting requirements.

Mechanically, the instrument does the following (selected headline points drawn from the text):

Adds specific content requirements for requests for questioning warrants, including lists of other recent warrants, necessity statements, known risks and vulnerabilities, and particular information when the request is for a minor questioning warrant (s6(1)(a)-(d)). It also permits oral requests or variations in exigent circumstances where the Director-General reasonably believes delay would prejudice security (s6(2)).
Requires notification and liaison with external oversight and policing bodies: the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security must be notified of requests and ASIO must inform IGIS, a prescribed authority, and relevant police of details and execution arrangements when a warrant is issued or varied (s7(1)-(2)).
Imposes recordkeeping obligations: maintenance of a written record of identity, authority, times, places and apprehension details (s8(1)); inclusion of that record in the statutory report under s34HA of the Act (s8(2)); and a written record of any breach of the instrument (s8A(1)).
Sets behavioural standards for questioning and presence of IGIS officials (s9(1)-(3)); requires information and notices to be provided in accessible form, with regard to age and known vulnerabilities, and in a language the person can understand (s9(4)-(6)); mandates that subjects be given copies of this instrument and a translated written summary at least 30 minutes before questioning (s9(7)(a), (d)); and obliges the prescribed authority to satisfy themselves that explanations were understood (s9(8)-(9)).

meta-content-style-type: text/css meta-content-type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8

Commonwealth Coat of Arms of Australia

Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (Statement of Procedures) Instrument 2025

I, MARK DREYFUS KC MP, Attorney-General, approve the following instrument.

Dated 3 March 2025

MARK DREYFUS KC MP

Attorney-General

Contents

1 Name

2 Commencement, Revocation and Replacement

3 Authority

4 Definitions

5 Application of Minister’s Guidelines

6 Questioning warrant requests

7 Arrangements for liaison

8 Written record in relation to a questioning warrant

8A Written record of any breach

9 Conduct of questioning et cetera

10 Where apprehension is authorised

11 Conduct of ordinary or frisk searches and screening

12 Use of force

12A Dual involvement of police

13 Health and welfare

14 Video recordings

15 Complaints made by the subject while appearing for questioning

16 Review

1 Name

This instrument is the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (Statement of Procedures) Instrument 2025.

2 Commencement, Revocation and Replacement

(1) This instrument commences the day on which the instrument is approved.

(2) This instrument revokes and replaces the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (Statement of Procedures) Instrument 2020.

3 Authority

This instrument is made under section 34AF of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979.

4 Definitions

Note: A number of expressions used in this instrument are defined in the Act, including the following:

adult questioning warrant;
communication device;
Director-General;
law enforcement agency;
lawyer;
minor questioning warrant;
minor’s representative;
Organisation;
police officer;
prescribed authority;
questioning warrant;
subject.

In this instrument:

Act means the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979.

master version means the original version of a video recording made in accordance with subsection 34DP(1) of the Act.

medical practitioner means an individual registered or licensed as a medical practitioner under a State or Territory law.

psychologist means an individual registered or licensed as a psychologist under a State or Territory law.

5 Application of Minister’s Guidelines

(1) The Organisation must observe any guidelines given by the Minister to the Director-General under subsection 8A(1) or 8A(2) of the Act to the extent it is relevant to a questioning warrant including in relation to proportionality of ASIO’s activities.

6 Questioning warrant requests

Additional requirements

(1) In addition to the things in subsection 34B(4) of the Act, a request for a questioning warrant must include:

(a) a statement of:

warrants (other than questioning warrants) under which the Organisation is, or has been within the past 6 months, authorised to do things in relation to the subject; and
why the Director-General considers it necessary that the warrant should be issued; and

(b) a statement of the particulars of any known risks involved in questioning the subject under a questioning warrant; and

(c) a statement of the particulars of any known vulnerabilities (including a physical, sensory, intellectual or psychiatric disability, or medical condition) or sensitivities (including religious beliefs or cultural identities) in relation to the subject, to the extent they are relevant to the questioning; or

(d) if the request is for a minor questioning warrant, all information known to the Director-General about the matters mentioned in subsection 34BB(3) of the Act (best interests of the person), including the special protections that should be considered in relation to the best interests of a person who is at least 14 years old but less than 18 years old, taking into account the person’s individual circumstances and needs (including their developmental status, any disabilities they may have, and whether the person belongs to any minority groups, as well as the other matters listed in subsection 34BB(3) of the Act).

Oral requests for warrants and variations

(2) Without limiting the circumstances in which a questioning warrant or a variation of a questioning warrant may be requested orally, the Director-General may request a warrant or variation orally if he or she reasonably believes the delay caused by making a written request may be prejudicial to security because:

(a) there may be an imminent threat to a person’s safety; or

(b) an act of politically motivated violence, espionage or foreign interference may be imminent.

7 Arrangements for liaison

(1) The Director-General must cause the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security to be notified of any request for a questioning warrant:

(a) if it is practicable to do so – before the request is made; or

(b) otherwise – as soon as practicable after the request is made.

(2) As soon as practicable after a questioning warrant is issued (or in the case of sub-paragraph (c) as soon as practicable after a variation to a questioning warrant is made), the Director-General must cause the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, a prescribed authority, and the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police or the relevant police force or police service, to be informed of:

details of the warrant;
the proposed arrangements for the execution of the warrant; and
details of any variations to the warrant.

8 Written record in relation to a questioning warrant

(1) The Director-General must cause the maintenance of a written record of the following in relation to a questioning warrant:

(a) the identity of the subject; and

(b) the authority for the questioning and apprehension (if any) of the subject; and

(c) the place, day and time of questioning under the warrant and the details of any time disregarded under section 34DL of the Act; and

(d) the place, day, time and duration of any apprehension of the subject.

(2) The Director-General must cause this record to be included in the report under section 34HA of the Act.

8A Written record of any breach

(1) The Organisation must keep a written record of any breach of this instrument.

9 Conduct of questioning et cetera

Manner

(1) In addition to the requirements under subsection 34AG (2) of the Act, all persons present during questioning under a questioning warrant or any period of apprehension must interact with the subject in a manner that is both humane and courteous, and must not speak to the subject in a demeaning manner.

(2) In addition to the requirements under subsection 34AG(2) of the Act, the subject must not be questioned in a manner that is unfair or oppressive in the circumstances.

(3) For the purpose of exercising a power or performing a function or duty as an IGIS official, an IGIS official may be present at the questioning or apprehension of the subject.

Understanding questioning

(4) Information given to the subject or a minor’s representative, including the written notice provided to the subject under section 34BH of the Act, must:

(a) in relation to the subject – have regard to the subject’s age, and to the extent practicable and relevant, any known vulnerabilities (including a physical, sensory, intellectual or psychiatric disability, or medical condition) in relation to the subject; and

(b) in relation to both the subject and minor’s representative – be given in a language the person can understand.

(5) An interpreter must be provided for the subject under section 34DN or 34DO of the Act if the prescribed authority believes on reasonable grounds that the subject is unable to communicate with reasonable fluency in the English language because:

(a) of inadequate knowledge of that language; or

(b) they are physically unable to communicate in that language.

Note: For example, the subject may be physically unable to communicate in the English language because they have a speech or hearing disability.

(6) An interpreter must be provided for the minor’s representative if the prescribed authority believes on reasonable grounds that the minor’s representative is unable to communicate with reasonable fluency in the English language because:

(a) of inadequate knowledge of that language; or

(b) they are physically unable to communicate in that language.

Note: For example, the minor’s representative may be physically unable to communicate in the English language because they have a speech or hearing disability.

Explanation of certain matters

(7) In addition to the requirements of sections 34DC and 34DD of the Act, when the subject first appears before a prescribed authority for questioning under a questioning warrant, the prescribed authority must:

(a) cause the subject to be given a copy of this instrument; and

(b) inform the subject that their right to make a complaint of the kind referred to in paragraph 34DC(1)(i) of the Act includes a right to make a complaint in relation to any contravention of this instrument; and

(c) inform the subject of the use which may be made of any information given, or record or other thing produced, by the subject, including any derivative use for the purpose of criminal investigations; and

(d) at least 30 minutes before questioning commences, provide to the subject and their legal representative, a written document in English, and if the subject does not understand English, a copy translated into a language the subject can understand, summarising the matters described in section 34DC and, if relevant, section 34DD of the Act and paragraphs (7)(b) and (c) above.

(8) The prescribed authority must satisfy themselves that the subject has understood the explanations given to the subject under sections 34DC and 34DD of the Act, and subsection (7).

(9) If the subject has a known vulnerability (including a physical, sensory, intellectual or psychiatric disability, or medical condition) which may be relevant to their understanding of the explanations referred to in subsection (8), the prescribed authority may at any time obtain advice from an appropriate medical practitioner or psychologist to satisfy themselves that the subject will understand, or has understood, the explanations.

Conditions of questioning

(10) The subject and, if applicable, a minor’s representative for the subject must have access to fresh drinking water and clean toilet and sanitary facilities at all times during questioning and the subject and minor’s representative must be permitted to use the toilet and sanitary facilities in private as required.

(11) If food is provided to the subject or a minor’s representative, the food must meet dietary requirements of the subject or minor’s representative.

(12) Where the subject of a minor questioning warrant or adult questioning warrant has been questioned for at least 4 hours in total, they, and where applicable a minor’s representative, are to be provided with food.

(13) The subject of an adult questioning warrant must not be questioned continuously for more than 4 hours without being offered a break.

Note: In accordance with paragraph 34BD(2)(b) of the Act, the subject of a minor questioning warrant can only be questioned for continuous periods of 2 hours or less without a break.

(14) A break as required by subsection (13) or paragraph 34BD(2)(b) of the Act must be at least 30 minutes in duration.

(15) Despite subsections (13) and (14) and (15A), the subject may, at any time:

(a) in the case of an adult questioning warrant – elect to forego a break; or

(b) in the case of an adult questioning warrant or minor questioning warrant – elect to take a break shorter than 30 minutes;

provided the prescribed authority is satisfied that this election is entirely voluntary.

(15A) In addition to subsection (13) and (14), the prescribed authority may, at any time they determine appropriate:

offer the subject of an adult questioning warrant breaks at intervals shorter than every four hours; and
where a break is offered at an interval shorter than four hours, reduce the break time to a minimum of 15 minutes.

(16) The subject of an adult questioning warrant or minor questioning warrant must be given a break of sufficient duration in any 24 hour period of questioning to ensure they have an opportunity for an appropriate amount of continuous and undisturbed sleep, having regard to the subject’s age.

(17) The amount of continuous and undisturbed sleep referred to in subsection (16) must be at least 8 hours. For minors this period of sleep must be at least 10 hours.

(18) During a break in questioning directed by the prescribed authority, the subject is not required to be at the place where they are appearing for questioning under a questioning warrant. Depending on the circumstances, the subject and a minor’s representative (where applicable) may be afforded transport, food, nearby accommodation or other assistance as required.

(19) The prescribed authority may warn a lawyer that they may be removed from questioning for unduly disrupting the questioning of the subject, prior to the prescribed authority directing the lawyer to be removed under subsection 34FF(6) of the Act.

(20) The prescribed authority may warn a minor’s representative that the minor’s representative may be removed from questioning for unduly disrupting the questioning of the subject, prior to the prescribed authority directing the minor’s representative to be removed under subsection 34FG(2) of the Act.

10 Where apprehension is authorised

(1) This section applies if a police officer is authorised to apprehend the subject under a questioning warrant or section 34C of the Act.

(2) A police officer must make the arrangements for the apprehension, and undertake the apprehension.

(3) Before the subject is apprehended, the Organisation must take all reasonable steps to ensure the following persons will be present when the subject arrives at the place where they are appearing for questioning under a questioning warrant:

(a) the prescribed authority; and

(b) a police officer; and

(d) if the prescribed authority has appointed a specified person as the lawyer for the subject – that person; and

(e) if the Organisation is satisfied that the prescribed authority is likely to appoint one or more specified persons as the lawyer for the subject – one such person; and

(f) if an interpreter is required an interpreter; and

(g) if the Organisation is satisfied that an interpreter is likely to be required – an interpreter.

(4) The arrangements for apprehension must be consistent with applicable police practices and procedures in relation to apprehension, and in accordance with any applicable legislation.

(5) The transportation to bring the subject before a prescribed authority for questioning under the warrant must be undertaken in a way which would not expose the subject to unnecessary physical hardship.

(6) A minor’s representative for the subject of a minor questioning warrant is permitted to be present at any time while the subject is apprehended.

(7) If the subject wishes to contact a person under section 34CB of the Act while apprehended the subject must be given facilities to enable the contact to be made which may, without limiting paragraph 34CB(2)(c) of the Act, include:

a device as referred to in paragraph (a) of the definition of communication device; and
contact details for any person the subject is permitted to contact; and
an interpreter.

Note: Under section 34CB of the Act, the subject while apprehended, may contact any of the following:

(a) a lawyer;

(b) if the warrant is a minor questioning warrant – a minor’s representative;

(c) any person the questioning warrant or a direction given by the prescribed authority under paragraph 34DE(1)(b) permits;

(d) the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security;

(e) the Ombudsman;

(f) the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police;

(g) a complaints agency relating to the police force or police service of the State or Territory (if applicable).

11 Conduct of ordinary or frisk searches and screening

(1) An ordinary or frisk search of the subject under subsection 34CC(2) or 34D(2)(c) of the Act must be conducted with appropriate sensitivity.

(1A) Subject to subsection 11(1), a minor’s representative is permitted to be present during an ordinary or frisk search of the minor under subsection 34CC(2) or 34D(2)(c) of the Act.

(2) If records or other things are seized by a police officer under subsection 34CC(4) or (5) of the Act, or given to a police officer under subsection 34D(5) of the Act, a police officer or person exercising authority of the warrant must cause:

(a) the record or things to be itemised in an inventory which must be signed by the subject, or if the subject is a minor, the minor’s representative, if he or she is able and willing to do so; and

(b) the subject, and if the subject is a minor, the minor’s representative, to be given a copy of the inventory referred to in paragraph (a); and

(c) the subject, and if the subject is a minor, the minor’s representative to be given a written notice informing them of:

the procedure for requesting the return of the records or things; and
the subject’s right to make a complaint of the kind referred to in paragraph 34DC(1)(i) of the Act in relation to the records or things; and

(d) the records or things to be retained in safe custody; and

(e) the subject, or if the subject is a minor, the minor’s representative, to be asked to sign a receipt on returning the record or things to the subject.

12 Use of force

(1) This section applies if a police officer is authorised to use force under section 34CA or 34CD of the Act.

(2) A police officer may only use the minimum force reasonably necessary in the circumstances.

12A Dual involvement of police

(1) The Organisation will inform, by written notice, the Australian Federal Police or relevant State or Territory police service that a police officer who has provided support under sections 10, 11 or 12 must not have any involvement in any current or future investigation, or prosecution involving the subject, other than a role as outlined under sections 10, 11 or 12 of this instrument, where that investigation or prosecution arises from or in connection to information obtained during questioning.

13 Health and welfare

Questioning place

(1) The place where the subject is appearing for questioning under a questioning warrant:

(a) must have adequate fresh air and ventilation, floor space, and heating and cooling appropriate to the climatic conditions; and

(b) must have sufficient natural or artificial light to permit reading; and

(d) must be appropriately furnished.

Health care

(2) The subject must be provided with necessary medical or other health care.

(3) Arrangements must be made for any recommendation made or treatment prescribed by a medical or health professional to be given effect.

Religion

(4) Subject to subsection (5), the subject must be permitted to engage in religious practices in accordance with the subject’s religion.

(5) The prescribed authority and persons exercising authority under the warrant may limit any religious practices under subsection (4) in accordance with the requirements of safety or security, or under the Act.

Subject of a minor questioning warrant

(6) The subject of a minor questioning warrant may only be apprehended, searched or questioned under conditions that take account of the subject’s particular needs and any special requirements having regard to the subject’s age and any known vulnerabilities (including a physical, sensory, intellectual or psychiatric disability, or medical condition). The Organisation must seek expert advice in assessing a minor’s particular needs and special requirements.

Other vulnerable persons

(7) The subject of a questioning warrant may only be apprehended, searched and questioned under conditions that take account of any known vulnerabilities (including a physical, sensory, intellectual or psychiatric disability or medical condition) or sensitivities (including religious beliefs or cultural identities) in relation to the subject. The Organisation may seek expert advice in assessing the particular needs and requirements of a vulnerable person.

14 Video recordings

Facilities for recording

(1) The Organisation is responsible for ensuring that there are facilities available for the making of video recordings in accordance with subsection 34DP(1) of the Act.

(2) The Organisation must ensure that the video recording facilities:

(a) make a clear visual recording of the subject’s appearance before a prescribed authority for the duration of questioning; and

(b) make a clear audio recording of all questions, answers, and statements made during questioning, including statements made by the prescribed authority in accordance with section 34DC of the Act.

(3) The prescribed authority must be notified if the video recording facilities fail to record as intended, or if the recording has to be suspended for whatever reason, to enable the prescribed authority to direct that questioning be deferred until recording can resume.

Notification to the subject

(4) Upon the commencement or resumption of any video recording of questioning in accordance with subsection 34DP(1) of the Act, the prescribed authority must inform the subject that the questioning is being recorded, and must state the time and day of the questioning.

Security of recordings

(5) The Organisation must ensure that a master version is retained of any video recording of the subject’s appearance before a prescribed authority for questioning.

(6) The master version must be kept in a secure system where the content cannot be subject to modification.

(7) A record must be kept of any persons that access the master version.

(8) The master version must be made available to the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security on request.

(9) The Organisation is responsible for ensuring that any copies of master versions, held by the Organisation are kept in a secure system and a record is kept of any persons that access such copies.

(10) If the Director-General is satisfied that any video recordings of a subject’s appearance before a prescribed authority are not required for the purposes of the performance of functions or exercise of powers under the Act, the recordings must be destroyed.

15 Complaints made by the subject while appearing for questioning

(1) This section applies if:

(a) the subject is appearing before a prescribed authority for questioning under a questioning warrant; and

(b) the subject, and where the subject is a minor, the minor’s representative, informs the prescribed authority that they want to make a complaint of the kind referred to in paragraph 34DC(1)(i) of the Act or give information of the kind referred to in paragraph 34DC(1)(j) of the Act; and

(c) the prescribed authority gives a direction deferring questioning for the purpose of allowing the subject or the minor’s representative to make the complaint or give the information.

(2) The subject, and where applicable the minor’s representative must be provided with such facilities as are, in the view of the prescribed authority, appropriate to make the complaint or give the information.

(3) The subject, and where applicable the minor’s representative, must be permitted to make the complaint or give the information outside of the hearing of persons present for the purposes of executing or supervising the execution of the warrant.

16 Review

The operation and continued suitability of this instrument will be reviewed in consultation with relevant stakeholders and ministers as appropriate, on a recurring basis to coincide with the review of the Minister’s Guidelines as detailed in paragraph 1.14 of the Guidelines.

meta-content-style-type: text/css meta-content-type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8

Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (Statement of Procedures) Instrument 2025

I, MARK DREYFUS KC MP, Attorney-General, approve the following instrument.

Dated 3 March 2025

MARK DREYFUS KC MP

Attorney-General

Contents

1 Name

2 Commencement, Revocation and Replacement

3 Authority

4 Definitions

5 Application of Minister’s Guidelines

6 Questioning warrant requests

7 Arrangements for liaison

8 Written record in relation to a questioning warrant

8A Written record of any breach

9 Conduct of questioning et cetera

10 Where apprehension is authorised

11 Conduct of ordinary or frisk searches and screening

12 Use of force

12A Dual involvement of police

13 Health and welfare

14 Video recordings

15 Complaints made by the subject while appearing for questioning

16 Review

1 Name

This instrument is the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (Statement of Procedures) Instrument 2025.

2 Commencement, Revocation and Replacement

(1) This instrument commences the day on which the instrument is approved.

(2) This instrument revokes and replaces the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (Statement of Procedures) Instrument 2020.

3 Authority

This instrument is made under section 34AF of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979.

4 Definitions

Note: A number of expressions used in this instrument are defined in the Act, including the following:

adult questioning warrant;
communication device;
Director-General;
law enforcement agency;
lawyer;
minor questioning warrant;
minor’s representative;
Organisation;
police officer;

The instrument organises around a compact set of interlocking concepts: authorisation, procedural transparency and oversight, subject welfare and comprehension, safeguards for minors and other vulnerable persons, police support roles and separation, recordkeeping and evidentiary integrity, and complaint and review channels.

Authorisation and scope: The instrument implements the procedural side of questioning warrants issued under the Act. It prescribes what must accompany a request for a warrant (s6), when oral requests are permissible (s6(2)), and liaison obligations when a warrant is sought or issued (s7). Authority for the instrument stems from s34AF of the Act (s3), which means the instrument supplements statutory warrant powers rather than creating new powers beyond the Act.

Transparency and oversight: The instrument builds mechanisms for oversight in three ways. First, it mandates pre- or near-contemporaneous notification of IGIS whenever a request is made (s7(1)). Second, it insists that IGIS be informed of warrant details, proposed execution arrangements and variations after issue (s7(2)). Third, it requires maintenance of written records of key facts about every questioning that must be included in the statutory reporting under s34HA (s8(1)-(2)), and keeps master video recordings accessible to IGIS (s14(5)-(8)). It also requires a written record of any breach of the instrument (s8A(1)). Those measures create documentary trails for later oversight and review.

Subject comprehension and vulnerability recognition: The instrument repeatedly requires ASIO to account for the subject’s age, vulnerabilities and language competence. Notices must be given in a language the subject (and a minor’s representative) can understand (s9(4)-(6)). The prescribed authority must ensure the explanations required under the Act and the instrument are understood and may obtain medical or psychological advice to that end (s9(8)-(9)). For minors, the instrument requires consideration of best interests and specific protections, and requires ASIO to provide all information known to the Director-General concerning the matters listed in the Act for minor warrants (s6(1)(d)).

Welfare and time limits: The instrument prescribes minimum welfare standards during questioning: access to water and sanitary facilities, dietary requirements, minimum breaks and rest periods, and specific sleep duration in any 24 hour period (s9(10)-(18)). Adults may not be questioned continuously for more than 4 hours without being offered a break (s9(13)). Minors are subject to the Act’s shorter continuous questioning limits and the instrument supplements with additional protections and expert-advice obligations (s9(13), note; s13(6)).

Police role and separation: Police perform apprehension and physical support tasks but the instrument limits their subsequent involvement in investigations or prosecutions related to information obtained in questioning (s10(2); s12A(1)). It requires ASIO to coordinate with police so that certain persons are in place when the subject arrives (s10(3)) and that apprehension is consistent with police practices and applicable legislation (s10(4)). The police must use only the minimum force reasonably necessary if authorised (s12(2)).

Recording, evidence and retention: The instrument mandates video and audio recording of questioning (s14(1)-(4)), requires retention of an unmodifiable master version in secure systems, access logging and IGIS access (s14(5)-(8)), and permits destruction of recordings where Director-General is satisfied they are not required (s14(10)). It also requires inventories and notices when items are seized and sets procedures for return (s11(2)(a)-(e)).

Complaint handling and review: The instrument clarifies the subject’s right to complain while appearing and requires facilities to enable complaints to be made out of hearing of those executing the warrant (s15(1)-(3)). The instrument will be reviewed on a recurring basis in consultation with stakeholders to align with the Minister’s Guidelines review schedule (s16).

Taken together, these concepts implement administrative process controls: increased information to decision-makers when seeking warrants; structured protections for comprehension and welfare during questioning; documentation and recording requirements to support oversight; defined roles for police; and channels for complaints and review.

Principal public bodies:

The Organisation, meaning ASIO, is the primary actor bound by these procedures. The Organisation must comply with all duties set out in the instrument: prepare and maintain records (s8, s8A), provide facilities and interpreters (s9(4)-(6), s14(1)-(3)), and observe the Minister’s Guidelines where relevant (s5).
The Director-General of Security has particular responsibilities: to request warrants (including orally where permitted) and to maintain records included in statutory reporting; the Director-General is the decision-maker who can be satisfied that recordings are not required and order their destruction (s6(2), s8(2), s14(10)). The Director-General also furnishes information to courts when seeking warrants (s6(1) content requirements).
Prescribed authorities are those who will appear for questioning (referenced repeatedly and defined in the Act). The prescribed authority controls the conduct of questioning on the spot, must provide notices and summaries, ensure understanding, and may direct breaks and remove lawyers or minor’s representatives for undue disruption (s9(7)-(9), (13)-(15), (19)-(20)).

Oversight and law enforcement:

The Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security is an external oversight recipient; ASIO must notify IGIS of warrant requests and issue details, and IGIS has direct rights of access to recordings (s7(1)-(2); s14(8)).
Police forces (AFP or relevant State or Territory police) are affected operationally: they must make and undertake apprehension arrangements where police are authorised to apprehend (s10(2)); their involvement in subsequent investigations or prosecutions arising from questioning-derived information is limited by written notice to the police (s12A(1)). Police personnel are also bound by the instrument when exercising powers under the warrant, for example minimum-force obligations (s12(2)) and inventory procedures for seized items (s11(2)).

Subjects, minors and their representatives:

Subjects of questioning warrants are directly affected by an expanded set of procedural rights and specified conditions of questioning: notifications, translated summaries at least 30 minutes before questioning, rights to water, toileting, food and sleep, time limits on continuous questioning, interpreters and accommodations for vulnerabilities (s9(4)-(18), s13(1)-(7), s14(4)).
Minors are singled out: requests for minor warrants must include all information known to the Director-General about the best interests matters in the Act and special protections for 14-17 year olds (s6(1)(d)). The minor’s representative has rights to be present during apprehension and searches (s10(6); s11(1A)) and to be given inventories and notices when items are seized (s11(2)(a)-(c)). The instrument obliges ASIO to seek expert advice on minors’ needs (s13(6)).

Third parties and service providers:

Interpreters, medical practitioners and psychologists are implicated as potential providers whose services must be secured where needed to ensure understanding and to assess vulnerabilities (s9(5), (6), (9)). The instrument requires translators for written notices where the subject does not understand English (s9(7)(d)).
Facilities and equipment providers must meet the recording and secure storage standards set by ASIO (s14(1)-(6)). Where video recording fails, prescribed authorities must be notified and questioning deferred until recording can resume (s14(3)).

Indirectly affected actors:

Lawyers: specified persons may be appointed as the lawyer for the subject and lawyers may be warned and removed for undue disruption; lawyers are also a class of person the subject may contact while apprehended (s10(3)(d)-(e); s9(19); s10 note).
Prosecutors and criminal investigators: the instrument requires notice to police limiting their involvement in prosecutorial investigations arising from questioning (s12A(1)). That procedural separation may affect evidence chains and decisions about using questioning-derived information in criminal matters.
Oversight agencies and complaints bodies (Ombudsman, police complaints agencies) are included in the list of persons a subject may contact (s10 note), and will therefore be engaged where complaints arise.

Financial and administrative burdens fall primarily on the Organisation and supporting police forces because they supply the facilities, interpreters, medical and psychological assessments, transport, accommodation where necessary, and recordkeeping infrastructure required by the instrument (s10(3), s13(2)-(3), s14(5)-(9), s11(2)(d)). Subjects and their legal representatives gain procedural protections and rights, but do not bear the compliance costs set out in the instrument.

This instrument sets out discrete duties for the Organisation, the Director-General, the prescribed authority, police and provides rights to subjects and their representatives. Below is an organised mapping to the text.

Duties of the Organisation and Director-General

Observe Minister’s Guidelines relevant to questioning warrants and proportionality (s5). That duty requires alignment of domestic inter-agency policy with ministerial guidance.
Ensure warrant requests include specified material: recent other warrants, necessity reasons, particulars of known risks and vulnerabilities, and for minors, information relating to best interests and special protections (s6(1)(a)-(d)).
Maintain written records of subject identity, authority for questioning and apprehension, place/day/time/duration of questioning and any time disregarded under s34DL, and include these records in the report under s34HA (s8(1)-(2)).
Maintain a written record of any breach of the instrument (s8A(1)).
Ensure the availability of adequate facilities for video/audio recording in accordance with s34DP(1) of the Act, and that recordings are clear and complete (s14(1)-(2)).
Retain master versions of recordings in a secure, non-modifiable system; keep access logs; make masters available to IGIS on request; and ensure copies are kept securely with access logs (s14(5)-(9)).
Ensure the subject is provided necessary medical or other health care and give effect to recommendations or prescribed treatment by medical or health professionals (s13(2)-(3)).
Provide for interpreters and translators where reasonable grounds indicate inability to communicate with reasonable fluency in English (s9(5)-(6); s9(7)(d)).
Ensure facilities for apprehension, including arranging transport that avoids unnecessary physical hardship, and ensure persons required to be present are in place on arrival (s10(2)-(5)).

Duties of the prescribed authority

Ensure persons present during questioning interact humanely and courteously and do not speak demeaningly to the subject (s9(1)). Ensure questioning is not unfair or oppressive (s9(2)).
Provide a copy of this instrument to the subject (s9(7)(a)), inform subjects of complaint rights including rights to complain about contraventions of the instrument (s9(7)(b)), explain how information produced may be used, including potential derivative use for criminal investigations (s9(7)(c)), and provide a written summarised notice in English and translated form at least 30 minutes before questioning (s9(7)(d)).
Satisfy themselves that the subject has understood explanations, and obtain medical or psychological advice where relevant vulnerabilities might affect understanding (s9(8)-(9)).
Ensure access to water, toilets and privacy, and meet dietary requirements if food is provided; provide food after 4 hours of total questioning (s9(10)-(12)).
Offer breaks: adults not continuously questioned for more than 4 hours without being offered a break; breaks must be at least 30 minutes unless the subject voluntarily elects to forego or accept a shorter break and the prescribed authority is satisfied the election is voluntary (s9(13)-(15)); ensure minimum sleep periods in any 24 hour period (s9(16)-(17)); allow option to be off-premises during breaks with transport, accommodation or assistance as required (s9(18)).
Notify the prescribed authority if recording facilities fail and defer questioning until recording can resume unless the prescribed authority directs otherwise (s14(3)).

Duties of police

Make and undertake arrangements for apprehension where authorised to apprehend (s10(2)); ensure arrangements are consistent with applicable police practices and legislation (s10(4)); use only the minimum force reasonably necessary (s12(2)).
When records or things are seized, itemise them in an inventory, give copies and notices about return procedures and complaints rights, retain seized items in safe custody and obtain a signed receipt on return (s11(2)(a)-(e)).

Rights of subjects, minors and representatives

Subjects must be given a copy of this instrument on first appearance and informed of complaint rights and potential uses of their statements (s9(7)(a)-(c)). They must also receive a written summary at least 30 minutes before questioning in a language they understand (s9(7)(d)).
Subjects and minor’s representatives have rights to humane treatment, privacy in toilet use, appropriate food and water, rest and sleep, interpreter services where needed, and to make complaints while appearing, with facilities to do so out of hearing of those executing the warrant (s9(1), s9(10)-(18), s9(4)-(6), s15(1)-(3)).
A subject while apprehended may contact a lawyer, the IGIS, Ombudsman, police commissioner, complaints agencies and others listed in s10 note; ASIO must provide facilities for such contact (s10(7) and note).
Minors have particular protections: the instrument requires consideration of their best interests when requesting a minor warrant and obliges ASIO to seek expert advice, and permits a minor’s representative to be present during apprehension and searches (s6(1)(d); s13(6); s10(6); s11(1A)).

Discretionary but controlled powers

The prescribed authority may limit religious practices for safety or security reasons (s13(4)-(5)).
The Director-General may determine recordings are not required and order destruction (s14(10)). That is a discretionary factual determination but is constrained by reporting and oversight requirements and the need to be "satisfied" that recordings are not required for performance of functions or exercise of powers under the Act.

Other procedural interactions

The instrument requires notification to IGIS before or as soon as practicable after a request is made (s7(1)). That creates an expectation of pre-emptive oversight where practicable.
The instrument establishes a reporting link: the records ASIO must create under s8 are to be included in the statutory report under s34HA of the Act (s8(2)), folding instrument-level documentation into statutory reporting.

These duties and rights are concrete administrative obligations that generate documentary and operational compliance, oversight possibilities and limitations on how questioning powers are exercised.

The instrument itself does not create criminal penalties or civil causes of action. It is an instrument made under s34AF of the Act and prescribes procedures ASIO must observe; enforcement occurs through statutory oversight, administrative reporting, internal accountability mechanisms and relevant external bodies rather than by imposing new offences in the instrument text.

Oversight and administrative enforcement mechanisms present in the instrument:

Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security: The instrument requires notification to IGIS of requests (s7(1)) and provision of details and execution arrangements as soon as practicable after issue or variation of a warrant (s7(2)). IGIS has access rights to master video recordings and thus can review conduct and compliance (s14(5)-(8)). IGIS’s investigatory, reporting and remedial powers are governed by the IGIS Act and the Act; the instrument creates direct procedural channels for IGIS oversight.
Reporting obligations: The Director-General must cause the written record detailed in s8 to be included in the statutory report under s34HA of the Act (s8(2)). That reporting generates public or parliamentary transparency subject to the confidentiality and national security limitations in the Act. Inclusion in s34HA reporting enables parliamentary and public scrutiny to the extent permitted by law.
Complaint handling: The instrument requires that the prescribed authority inform subjects of their rights to complain about contraventions of the instrument (s9(7)(b)); it mandates that subjects making complaints while appearing be given facilities and permitted to do so out of hearing (s15(1)-(3)). Complaints can be directed to IGIS, the Ombudsman, police complaints agencies and other bodies listed in the Act (s10 note). Those bodies have investigatory powers and may make findings or recommendations under their respective statutes. The instrument does not specify remedies for successful complaints; those depend on the powers of the investigating body and the Act’s remedial framework.
Internal breach recording: The Organisation must keep a written record of any breach of the instrument (s8A(1)). That internal documentation creates traceability for subsequent administrative action, discipline, or external audit.
Police procedural constraints: The instrument requires police to follow applicable police practices and legislation when apprehending (s10(4)) and to use minimum force (s12(2)). If a police officer departs from those standards, internal police disciplinary mechanisms, civil liability regimes or criminal law may be engaged outside the instrument where misconduct occurs. The instrument also requires written notice to police that officers who support questioning must not be involved in related investigations or prosecutions beyond specified roles (s12A(1)). Failure to comply with that notice may raise internal police accountability issues.

Absent direct statutory penalties in the instrument, enforcement therefore depends on:

IGIS capacity and action, including review findings and reporting to Parliament;
complaint mechanisms through the Ombudsman and police oversight bodies;
internal administrative and disciplinary processes within ASIO and police services; and
statutory remedies or litigation in ordinary courts where other laws (including tort, human rights or constitutional principles) might be engaged by conduct during questioning, subject to national security protections and limitations in the Act.

The instrument requires recordkeeping that supports oversight and enforcement but does not itself create new criminal sanctions. Practitioners should therefore look to the Act and to oversight statutes (IGIS Act, Ombudsman Act and relevant police governance regimes) to identify legal consequences for contraventions of the instrument.

The instrument is integrally connected to the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979. It is made under s34AF of the Act and operationalises a cluster of Act provisions by setting out procedural details for exercising power under questioning warrants. Throughout, the instrument cross-references and presumes the operation of specific Act sections, for example s34B (warrant requests), s34BB (minor warrants), s34BH (written notice to subjects), s34CB (communications while apprehended), s34CC and s34D (search powers and dealings with records), s34DP (recording of questioning), s34HA (reporting), s34AG (conduct requirements), s34CA and s34CD (use of force), s34FF and s34FG (removal of lawyer or minor’s representative), and s34DL (time disregarded for questioning length) (see s6, s9, s11, s12, s14, s8). The instrument does not alter the Act, but specifies how ASIO and cooperating agencies must implement the Act’s powers.

Interaction with oversight and administrative law:

IGIS statutory powers: The instrument structures immediate notification requirements to IGIS (s7) and gives IGIS access to master recordings (s14(8)). That situates the instrument within the IGIS oversight architecture. The instrument’s documentary obligations (s8, s8A) create the records IGIS will use in its reviews and reports.
Minister’s Guidelines: The instrument requires ASIO to observe Guidelines given by the Minister under subsection 8A(1) or (2) of the Act to the extent they are relevant to questioning warrants and proportionality (s5). The instrument thus functions in tandem with executive-level policy guidance. The Guidelines themselves, and their review, will shape operational decisions under the instrument.

Interaction with police and state laws:

Police statutory regimes: Where police are authorised to apprehend, the instrument requires apprehension arrangements to be consistent with applicable police practices and relevant legislation (s10(4)). That ensures interplay with State and Territory policing laws, use-of-force statutes, custody legislation and criminal procedure rules.
Registration and licensing laws: The instrument defines "medical practitioner" and "psychologist" by reference to State and Territory registration or licensing (s4). ASIO’s obligations to secure appropriate medical and psychological advice (s9(9); s13(2)-(3), (6)-(7)) therefore interact with professional regulation frameworks.

Interaction with privacy, evidentiary and criminal laws:

Evidentiary uses and derivative use: The instrument requires the prescribed authority to inform the subject of the use which may be made of information given or of records produced, including derivative use for criminal investigations (s9(7)(c)). That explicit notice acknowledges potential interaction between questioning-derived material and criminal proceedings. The instrument also restricts police involvement in subsequent investigations arising from questioning (s12A(1)), which creates administrative separation that will affect the chain-of-evidence and prosecutorial decisions.
Records and retention: Master recordings are subject to retention, access logging and IGIS inspection (s14(5)-(8)). The Director-General may order destruction if satisfied recordings are not required (s14(10)); that interacts with evidence preservation demands under criminal or civil process and with any statutory disclosure obligations, which may be affected by national security privileges in the Act.
Human rights and criminal procedure: The instrument prescribes procedures that bear on rights typically protected under criminal justice frameworks, such as nondemeaning treatment, safeguards for minors, access to lawyers and interpreter services (s9(1)-(7), s10 note). Where these intersect with statutory human rights instruments or common law principles, practitioners must consider the Act’s statutory limitations on disclosure and defence access.

Administrative obligations and employment law:

The instrument requires ASIO to provide training and facilities to ensure humane treatment and proper recording, and to keep records of breaches (s9(1); s14(5)-(9); s8A(1)). Those obligations will affect ASIO’s internal compliance and training regimes and may implicate personnel policies and discipline for misconduct.

Interaction with external complaint and oversight mechanisms:

Complaints to Ombudsman, police complaints agencies and IGIS: The instrument maps out how complaints made by subjects while appearing should be handled and where they can be directed (s15(1)-(3); s10 note). Complaints will therefore plug into existing statutory complaint systems.

In short, the instrument is procedural scaffolding that sits inside the Act and touches multiple external legal regimes: oversight statutes, police law, professional regulation, privacy/evidence frameworks and complaint mechanisms. It does not displace those laws but creates operational requirements that determine how ASIO and cooperating agencies will comply with and interact with those frameworks in practice.

The instrument itself contains a minimal explicit amendment history. It states that it revokes and replaces the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (Statement of Procedures) Instrument 2020 (s2(2)). The 2025 instrument therefore supersedes the 2020 instrument in full. Beyond that express replacement, there are two additional signals about change and review:

Commencement and replacement: The instrument commences the day it is approved and immediately revokes its predecessor (s2(1)-(2)). That means any procedural practices under the 2020 instrument should no longer govern ASIO from the day the 2025 instrument is approved.
Periodic review: Section 16 requires that the operation and continued suitability of the instrument be reviewed in consultation with relevant stakeholders and ministers on a recurring basis to coincide with the review of the Minister’s Guidelines as detailed at paragraph 1.14 of the Guidelines (s16). This embeds a scheduled review mechanism tied to the Minister’s Guidelines review cycle. The instrument does not set a fixed interval in weeks or years in the instrument text, instead linking to the Guidelines timetable.

Because the instrument revokes and replaces a named 2020 document, the operative history is at least a two-stage sequence: 2020 instrument replaced by 2025 instrument. The instrument does not in itself list specific textual amendments relative to the 2020 instrument inside its own text. Practitioners seeking to map precise drafting changes (word-level differences, new clauses, removed clauses or reordering) must therefore compare the 2020 instrument with the 2025 instrument. The instrument’s text does not contain transitional provisions or savings clauses beyond the repeal; it is a straight replacement.

The instrument also repeatedly references the Minister’s Guidelines under subsection 8A(1) or (2) of the Act (s5). Because the instrument requires ASIO to observe those Guidelines where relevant, any future amendments to the Guidelines will change the operational landscape in which the instrument operates; section 16 contemplates that link and synchronises review cycles accordingly.

In summary: the explicit amendment history contained in the instrument is limited to revocation of the 2020 Statement of Procedures and mandating recurring review aligned to Ministerial Guidelines. There are no further historical annotations, schedules of amendments, or savings and transitional rules included in the text.

The instrument contains no references to litigation, judicial determinations or case law. It does not name any cases, nor does it cite judicial interpretations of the Act. The instrument is a procedural administrative instrument intended to guide ASIO’s internal and cooperative conduct when exercising statutory powers. Consequently, there is no litigation history recorded within the instrument itself.

Implications for practitioners and researchers:

Absence of cases in the instrument does not mean the instrument is immune from judicial review or other legal challenge. The instrument is subordinate to primary legislation and to constitutional and common law limits. Any legal challenges to the way the instrument is applied would turn on facts and statutory interpretation under the Act and relevant constitutional or administrative law principles outside the instrument’s text.
The instrument creates documentary trails that could be relied on in litigation or oversight inquiries. The written records the Organisation must keep (s8, s8A), the master video retention and access rules (s14(5)-(9)), and the requirements for providing notices and ensuring understanding (s9(7)-(9)) are precisely the sorts of procedural safeguards that courts or oversight bodies may examine in complaints or judicial review proceedings.
Because the instrument expressly requires liaison with IGIS and provision of materials to oversight bodies (s7, s14(8)), IGIS investigations or reports could generate administrative findings that later inform litigation or parliamentary scrutiny.
Where criminal prosecutions or civil claims arise and involve information obtained during questioning, the instrument’s provisions on recording, inventorying seized items, and restrictions on police involvement (s11(2); s14; s12A(1)) will be relevant factual and legal points in evidentiary disputes. The Director-General’s power to order destruction of recordings where satisfied they are not required (s14(10)) may raise evidentiary concerns in subsequent proceedings; preservation and disclosure obligations under other statutes or judicial process could be engaged.

Because the instrument itself contains no litigation examples or precedent, practitioners must rely on the Act, oversight statutes and broader administrative, evidentiary and human rights law when assessing legal risk or the likelihood of litigation arising from use of these procedural rules.

The instrument is detailed and imposes a number of specific procedural steps. Several potential pitfalls or points of operational friction should be considered by practitioners advising ASIO, police, subjects or their representatives.

Oral warrant requests and the threshold for "prejudicial to security" (s6(2))

The Director-General may request a warrant or variation orally where he or she reasonably believes delay caused by a written request may be prejudicial because of an imminent threat to safety or imminent politically motivated violence, espionage or foreign interference (s6(2)(a)-(b)). Practitioners should note the instrument does not define "prejudicial" or "imminent" beyond those examples; reliance on oral requests will need contemporaneous written justification to satisfy internal and external scrutiny. Absent clear contemporaneous rationale, an oral request could be vulnerable to challenge for procedural irregularity.

Expanded warrant-request content increases pre-issuance disclosure risk and workload (s6(1))

Warrant requests must now list other warrants authorised within the past six months and set out known risks and vulnerabilities (s6(1)(a)-(c)). This increases the pre-application information burden on the Director-General’s office and may reveal sensitive operational information in the warrant record. Practitioners should ensure processes for preparing warrants are resourced and that sensitive operational information is handled under appropriate secrecy protections while still producing the required particulars.

Timing for providing a translated written summary and proving understanding (s9(7)(d), (8)-(9))

The prescribed authority must provide a written summary at least 30 minutes before questioning commences in English and, if required, translated into a language the subject can understand (s9(7)(d)). The prescribed authority must also satisfy themselves that the subject has understood explanations (s9(8)). Meeting the 30-minute rule requires interpreter and translation resources to be in place before questioning. Failing to meet the translation or 30-minute requirements could expose the questioning to procedural objection or complaint.

Mandatory provision of food and sleep and complexity of cumulative timing (s9(10)-(18))

The instrument requires food be provided where questioning has reached at least 4 hours in total, and mandates minimum sleep (8 hours adults, 10 hours minors) in any 24 hour period (s9(12), (16)-(17)). Operationally, this requires ASIO to manage cumulative questioning schedules and to account for the subject’s prior detention or rest. Failure to provide the required sleep window or food could be a compliance breach and generate complaints or oversight scrutiny.

Director-General’s power to destroy recordings (s14(10))

The Director-General may destroy video recordings if satisfied they are not required for the performance of functions or powers under the Act. This is a discretionary power with potential evidentiary consequences where material could be relevant to later investigations, prosecutions or complaints. Practitioners must ensure robust decision-making records before destruction, and be alert to any other statutory preservation obligations or legal process requests that may preclude destruction.

Master-copy security and access logs (s14(5)-(9))

The instrument requires master versions to be kept in a secure system where content cannot be modified, and records of access to masters and copies be maintained (s14(5)-(9)). Ensuring non-modifiability and defensible access logs requires technical and procedural investment. Poorly configured systems may fail to meet the instrument’s standard and invite challenges about recording integrity.

Inventory and signature requirements for seized items (s11(2)(a)-(c))

When items are seized, the inventory must be signed by the subject or minor’s representative "if he or she is able and willing to do so" (s11(2)(a)). ASIO needs to document the subject’s refusal or inability to sign. Practitioners should preserve evidence of attempts to obtain signatures to avoid later disputes about what was seized.

Police support and separation (s10(2)-(4); s12A)

Police undertake apprehension, but the instrument requires written notice to police that officers who supported questioning must not be involved in subsequent investigations or prosecutions arising from information obtained during questioning (s12A(1)). Implementation requires administrative coordination between ASIO and police HR and case allocation practices. Failure to effect appropriate segregation could be operationally hazardous and raise conflict-of-interest or contamination concerns.

Vulnerability, expert advice and accommodation expectations (s9(9); s13(6)-(7))

For minors and other vulnerable persons, the instrument requires ASIO to seek expert advice in assessing needs (s13(6)-(7); s9(9)). Practitioners should ensure availability of medical and psychological expertise and must resource them; ad hoc assessments during an operation could be impracticable if not pre-arranged.

Complaints while appearing require private facilities and instruction (s15(1)-(3))

If a subject or minor’s representative wants to make a complaint while appearing, questioning must be deferred and facilities provided (s15(1)-(3)). This requires on-site arrangements and immediate procedures to handle complaints, potentially delaying operational timelines.

Interaction with other legal duties and evidence preservation

The instrument’s processes (for example destruction of recordings (s14(10))) must be reconciled with other statutory obligations to preserve evidence or respond to judicial process. Practitioners must be alert to conflicting legal duties that may limit ASIO’s capacity to destroy material.

No internal penalties specified for breach

The instrument mandates record-keeping for breaches (s8A(1)) but does not itself impose penalties. Remedies for contraventions will come through oversight bodies or other statutory mechanisms. Practitioners should therefore preserve detailed contemporaneous records to mitigate or rebut complaints.

Each of these points is a concrete operational risk where attention to documentation, resourcing (interpreters, translation, recording infrastructure, medical experts), and chain-of-command decision-making will materially affect compliance.

This section gives a practical, clause-referenced checklist and operational steps for ASIO, prescribed authorities, police and counsel to align with the instrument. Compliance requires administrative resources, pre-planned logistical capacity and clear internal roles.

A. Before seeking or requesting a questioning warrant

Prepare warrant request packet to include (s6(1)):
- Statement of other warrants (other than questioning warrants) authorised in relation to the subject within the past 6 months and why the Director-General considers the questioning warrant necessary (s6(1)(a)(1)-(2)).
- Statement of particulars of any known risks involved in questioning the subject (s6(1)(b)).
- Statement of particulars of any known vulnerabilities or sensitivities (physical, sensory, intellectual, psychiatric disability, medical condition, religious beliefs, cultural identities) relevant to questioning (s6(1)(c)).
- If requesting a minor questioning warrant, include all information known to the Director-General about the best interests matters under s34BB, including particular protections for persons aged 14-17 (s6(1)(d)).
Prepare documentary records to support any oral request (s6(2)):
- Where an oral request is contemplated, prepare a contemporaneous written justification explaining the Director-General’s reasonable belief that delay would prejudice security and why the oral route is necessary, with times and witnesses.

B. Liaison and notification requirements

Notify IGIS of any request for a questioning warrant before the request if practicable; otherwise notify as soon as practicable after the request (s7(1)).
As soon as practicable after a questioning warrant is issued or varied, inform IGIS, a prescribed authority, and relevant police force of the warrant details, proposed execution arrangements and any variations (s7(2)(1)-(3)).

C. Recordkeeping and breach logs

Maintain a written record for each questioning warrant containing: subject identity; authority for questioning and apprehension; place, day, time of questioning and details of any time disregarded under s34DL; and place/day/time/duration of any apprehension (s8(1)(a)-(d)).
Ensure that the written record is included in the statutory report under s34HA (s8(2)).
Keep a written record of any breach of the instrument (s8A(1)).

D. Pre-appearance and on-arrival procedures

Ensure, before apprehension, that the following will be present on arrival: prescribed authority; police officer(s); ASIO questioning officers; appointed or likely lawyer(s) for the subject; interpreter if required; and make reasonable steps to ensure these persons will be present (s10(3)(a)-(g)).
Confirm apprehension arrangements conform to applicable police practices and legislation (s10(4)) and that transport will avoid unnecessary physical hardship (s10(5)).

E. Notices, translation and comprehension

On first appearance, provide the subject with a copy of this instrument (s9(7)(a)).
Inform the subject that their right to complain includes a right to complain about contraventions of this instrument (s9(7)(b)).
Inform the subject of possible uses of any information or records supplied, including derivative use in criminal investigations (s9(7)(c)).
At least 30 minutes before questioning, provide to the subject and their legal representative a written document in English, and if the subject does not understand English, a translated copy in a language the subject can understand, summarising the matters in s34DC, s34DD where relevant, and paragraphs (7)(b) and (c) (s9(7)(d)).
The prescribed authority must satisfy themselves the subject has understood the explanations; if vulnerabilities may affect understanding, obtain medical or psychological advice (s9(8)-(9)).

F. Interpreter, translator and accessibility arrangements

Provide an interpreter where prescribed authority believes on reasonable grounds the subject or minor’s representative cannot communicate with reasonable fluency in English, including where physical inability exists (s9(5)-(6)).
Maintain access to translators for written notices and have a process to obtain translations within the 30-minute window noted above (s9(7)(d)).

G. Welfare, breaks and sleep

Ensure access at all times to fresh drinking water and clean toilet and sanitary facilities with private use (s9(10)).
If food is provided, ensure dietary requirements are met (s9(11)).
Provide food where the subject has been questioned for at least 4 hours in total (s9(12)).
Adults must not be questioned continuously for more than 4 hours without being offered a break; minors are subject to shorter limits under the Act (s9(13) and note).
Breaks must be at least 30 minutes unless the subject voluntarily elects otherwise; the prescribed authority must be satisfied the election is voluntary (s9(14)-(15)).
Prescribed authority may offer more frequent breaks and can reduce break time to 15 minutes if appropriate (s9(15A)).
Ensure subjects receive the minimum continuous undisturbed sleep in any 24 hour period: at least 8 hours for adults and 10 hours for minors; provide transport, nearby accommodation or assistance during breaks as needed (s9(16)-(18)).

H. Searches, seizure and inventories

Conduct ordinary or frisk searches with appropriate sensitivity; a minor’s representative may be present for minors (s11(1), (1A)).
If records or things are seized or handed to police, itemise them in an inventory and, where the subject or the minor’s representative is able and willing, obtain their signature (s11(2)(a)).
Provide the subject and minor’s representative with a copy of the inventory and a written notice explaining procedures to request return of items and complaint rights (s11(2)(b)-(c)).
Retain seized items in safe custody and ask the subject or minor’s representative to sign a receipt when returning items (s11(2)(d)-(e)).

I. Use of force and police roles

Where police are authorised to use force, ensure they are instructed to use only the minimum force reasonably necessary in the circumstances (s12(2)).
Provide written notice to the Australian Federal Police or relevant State/Territory service that any supporting police officer must not have involvement in current or future investigations or prosecutions involving the subject arising from information obtained during questioning beyond roles permitted under sections 10, 11 or 12 of the instrument (s12A(1)).
Coordinate with police to ensure separation of operational roles post-questioning to avoid contamination of investigative lines.

J. Medical, psychological and religious accommodations

Provide necessary medical or other health care and make arrangements to give effect to medical recommendations or prescriptions (s13(2)-(3)).
Permit religious practices subject to safety and security limitations and ASIO/prescribed authority judgment (s13(4)-(5)).
For minors and other vulnerable persons, seek expert advice in assessing particular needs and special requirements and ensure conditions of apprehension, search and questioning account for such needs (s13(6)-(7)).

K. Video and audio recording

Ensure facilities exist to make a clear visual and audio recording of the subject’s appearance for the duration of questioning in accordance with s34DP(1) (s14(1)-(2)).
Upon commencement or resumption of recording, inform the subject recording is taking place and state time and day (s14(4)).
Keep a secure master version in a system where content cannot be modified, maintain access logs, and make master versions available to IGIS on request (s14(5)-(8)).
Keep copies securely and maintain access logs for copies (s14(9)).
If the Director-General is satisfied recordings are not required for performance of functions or powers under the Act, destroy them in accordance with documented decision-making (s14(10)). Ensure preservation obligations and any judicial process are considered before destruction.

L. Complaints

If a subject or minor’s representative indicates they wish to make a complaint while appearing, the prescribed authority should defer questioning to permit the complaint or information to be given (s15(1)).
Provide facilities to make the complaint and permit complaints to be made outside the hearing of those executing the warrant (s15(2)-(3)).
Inform subjects how to contact IGIS, Ombudsman, police complaint agencies or other permitted contacts while apprehended (s10 note; s10(7)).

M. Review and continuous improvement

Document processes, breaches and corrective actions, and feed these into the recurring review aligned with the Minister’s Guidelines (s16).
Maintain liaison channels with IGIS, police, and prescribed authorities to ensure procedural lessons are surfaced and remedial action taken when deficits are identified (s7(1)-(2); s8A(1)).

N. Training, systems and resourcing

Invest in secure non-modifiable recording infrastructure and access logging meeting s14 standards.
Maintain a roster of qualified interpreters, translators, medical practitioners and psychologists available on short notice.
Train staff, prescribed authorities and cooperating police in humane and courteous interaction standards (s9(1)), break and welfare rules, and inventory procedures.

Following these steps and maintaining contemporaneous documentation will materially reduce compliance risk and produce the records required for oversight review, complaint handling and internal audit.

Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (Statement of Procedures) Instrument 2025

Plain English Summary

Deep Dive

What it does

Current sections