Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission Bill 2026 explained

The short answer

Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission Bill 2026 explained

The Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission Bill 2026 is a government bill introduced in the House of Representatives on 25 March 2026 by the Minister for Home Affairs. It is accompanied by a related bill, the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission (National Policing Information Charges) Bill 2026, which deals with charges for national policing information services. Together, they represent a legislative package that refreshes the governing framework for one of Australia's key law enforcement and intelligence agencies. The bill continues the existence of the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission, or ACIC, as Australia's national criminal intelligence agency, but with realigned functions and powers. According to the official parliamentary summary, the bill equips the ACIC to: obtain, analyse and communicate intelligence relevant to serious and organised crime; provide nationally coordinated criminal history check services; prepare and issue criminal intelligence assessments; and provide advice about crime trends, criminal activity and preventing crime. The ACIC was established in 2016 through the merger of the Australian Crime Commission, or ACC, and CrimTrac. The ACC had existed since 2002, though its lineage traces back to the National Crime Authority established in 1984. CrimTrac was the national policing information sharing service that managed systems used by every police force in Australia, including the national fingerprint database, the national DNA database, and the national criminal history check system. The merger was intended to create a single agency that combined criminal intelligence functions with the technical infrastructure for national police information sharing. This new bill appears to be a legislative update that refreshes and realigns the ACIC's governing legislation, potentially reflecting lessons learned over the first decade of the merged agency's operations. The bill was introduced and had its second reading moved on 25 March 2026. It is currently before the House of Representatives awaiting resumption of the second reading debate. No proposed amendments had been circulated at the time of writing. The government, through the minister's second reading speech, has framed this bill as a necessary update to ensure the ACIC has the legislative framework it needs to combat serious and organised crime effectively. Several parliamentary committees have already begun their scrutiny of the bill, which is notable and indicates the bill engages significant questions about civil liberties, human rights, and the appropriate scope of intelligence agency powers. On 30 March 2026, the bill was referred to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, or PJCIS, for inquiry. The PJCIS is a statutory committee established under the Intelligence Services Act 2001 that reviews matters relating to Australia's intelligence and security agencies. Its inquiry into this bill will examine the proposed powers and functions in detail, take evidence from the ACIC, the Australian Federal Police, state and territory police, legal and human rights organisations, and other stakeholders, and is a critical part of the legislative scrutiny process. The PJCIS has a track record of recommending significant amendments to national security and intelligence legislation, and its report will be an important checkpoint before the bill proceeds further. The Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills considered the bill and published its assessment in Scrutiny Digest 6 of 2026 on 6 May 2026. The Scrutiny of Bills Committee examines all bills against a set of scrutiny principles, including whether they trespass unduly on personal rights and liberties, whether they provide appropriate parliamentary oversight of delegated powers, and whether they delegate legislative power inappropriately. The committee's comments on this bill would typically flag any provisions that raise scrutiny concerns, such as expanded coercive information-gathering powers, broad secrecy provisions, or provisions that make rights dependent on non-reviewable administrative decisions. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights also considered the bill and published its assessment in Report 5 of 2026 on 7 May 2026. This committee examines bills for compatibility with Australia's international human rights obligations under seven core treaties. Its report would assess whether the bill's provisions — particularly any coercive information-gathering powers, powers to share personal information between agencies, or criminal offences created by the bill — are consistent with rights such as privacy, fair trial, freedom of expression, and freedom from arbitrary detention. The involvement of three separate parliamentary committees in scrutinising this bill should give readers confidence that the bill is receiving thorough examination before it proceeds to a vote. The committee reports are publicly available and provide an important independent perspective on what the bill would actually do, as distinct from what the government claims it would do. The Parliamentary Library has also published a Bills Digest providing independent analysis of the bill's provisions, background, and implications. For the bill to become law, it must complete its passage through the House of Representatives — including resumption and conclusion of the second reading debate, consideration in detail where the bill is examined clause by clause, and third reading — before being introduced in the Senate and passing through equivalent stages there. The companion bill dealing with national policing information charges must also pass. If the PJCIS recommends amendments, these would need to be considered and potentially adopted by the government before the bill proceeds. Once passed by both houses in identical form, the bill would be presented to the Governor-General for royal assent.

This is a federal system guide. State constitutions, parliaments and local-government laws can allocate comparable functions differently.

The useful question is not only “what is the rule?” but also “who administers it, which document controls it, and when might it change?” That distinction prevents an accurate general explanation from becoming wrong advice in a particular election, chamber or policy setting.

Evidence review

What the bill proposes

The Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission Bill 2026 proposes to continue the existence of the ACIC as Australia's national criminal intelligence agency, but with realigned functions and powers. The official summary identifies four key areas of ACIC activity under the bill: obtaining, analysing and communicating intelligence relevant to serious and organised crime; providing nationally coordinated criminal history check services; preparing and issuing criminal intelligence assessments; and providing advice about crime trends, criminal activity and crime prevention.

The bill is a form of legislative refresh. The ACIC was created in 2016 by merging the Australian Crime Commission and CrimTrac. This bill appears to update and consolidate the ACIC's governing legislation, potentially addressing operational lessons from the agency's first decade, aligning its legislative framework with contemporary crime-fighting needs — such as the increasing role of technology in serious and organised crime — and ensuring appropriate oversight and accountability mechanisms are in place.

A companion bill — the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission (National Policing Information Charges) Bill 2026 — was introduced alongside this bill and deals specifically with the charges the ACIC can levy for national policing information services, such as criminal history checks provided to employers, licensing bodies and individuals seeking to work or volunteer in sensitive roles. The two bills should be read together as a single reform package.

Evidence review

Current parliamentary status

The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives on 25 March 2026. The first reading was followed by the minister moving the second reading on the same day. The second reading debate had not resumed at the time of writing, and the bill remains before the House of Representatives. No proposed amendments have been circulated, and no date has been set for the debate to resume.

The bill is being scrutinised by three parliamentary committees, which is a strong indicator that its provisions engage significant questions of rights and powers. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, or PJCIS, is conducting a full inquiry. The Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills published its assessment in Scrutiny Digest 6 of 2026 on 6 May 2026. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights published its assessment in Report 5 of 2026 on 7 May 2026.

Evidence review

Committee scrutiny and what to watch for

The involvement of three parliamentary committees signals that this bill is not a routine administrative measure. The PJCIS inquiry is the most important of these. The PJCIS has a track record of recommending substantive amendments to national security and intelligence legislation, and its report will be a crucial checkpoint before the bill proceeds to a vote. Stakeholders interested in the bill should monitor the PJCIS inquiry page for hearing dates and published submissions.

The Scrutiny of Bills Committee typically flags provisions that may unduly trespass on personal rights and liberties, make rights dependent on non-reviewable decisions, or inappropriately delegate legislative power to the executive. In the context of a criminal intelligence agency bill, common scrutiny concerns include the breadth of coercive information-gathering powers — such as the power to compel individuals to answer questions or produce documents — the adequacy of oversight and review mechanisms, and the protection and handling of sensitive personal information collected by the agency.

The Human Rights Committee assesses bills against seven international human rights treaties to which Australia is a party. For an intelligence agency bill, the committee would typically examine: whether coercive powers are proportionate to their legitimate aim of combating serious crime; whether privacy rights are adequately protected when personal information is collected, used and shared; whether procedural fairness is maintained in administrative decisions affecting individuals; and whether any criminal offences created by the bill are consistent with fair trial rights and the presumption of innocence.

Evidence review

Who would be affected

The bill directly affects the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission and its staff, whose functions, powers and governance arrangements would be governed by the new legislative framework. It also affects state and territory police forces, which are the primary users of ACIC intelligence products and the national policing information systems the agency manages, including the national fingerprint and DNA databases.

The bill also affects individuals and organisations subject to the ACIC's intelligence activities — including people who may be compelled to provide information under coercive examination powers — and the millions of Australians who rely on ACIC-provided criminal history checks each year for employment, volunteering with children, licensing applications, and other purposes. The realignment of functions may also affect other Commonwealth agencies with overlapping responsibilities in law enforcement, intelligence gathering and border protection, including the Australian Federal Police, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, and the Australian Border Force.

Evidence review

What steps remain before it could become law

The bill must complete its passage through the House of Representatives: the second reading debate must resume and conclude with a vote, the bill may proceed to consideration in detail where amendments can be proposed and debated clause by clause, and a third reading vote must pass the bill. It must then be introduced in the Senate and pass equivalent stages there — first reading, second reading debate, committee stage, and third reading.

The PJCIS inquiry is a critical step that will shape the bill's future. The committee will take evidence from a range of stakeholders and its report may recommend amendments, which the government could accept or reject. The Scrutiny of Bills and Human Rights committee assessments will inform parliamentary debate and may provide the basis for amendments proposed by non-government members.

Once passed by both houses in identical form, the bill is presented to the Governor-General for royal assent. The provisions would commence according to the commencement clauses in the bill — typically on a date fixed by proclamation, which allows time for the ACIC to prepare administratively for the new legislative framework.

Common questions

Before you rely on the answer