- Customs search travellers for porn
- Changes to rules were "sneaked through"
- Inquiry into the changes demanded
POWERS allowing customs officials to search travellers arriving in Australia for pornography have been labelled as "sneaky" and an "invasion of privacy".
The first question on custom's Incoming Passenger Cards has been changed to ask people if they are carrying pornography.
Those answering "yes" will have their material examined by customs officials.
A Customs and Border Protection spokesperson said the change was made late last year because the term "pornography" was more recognisable to travellers than the term "objectionable material".
Objectionable material is material that is highly offensive and includes child pornography, bestiality, explicit sexual violence, and graphic degradation.
The spokesman said the "express reference" to pornography was intended to make travellers aware that some forms of pornography were illegal to bring into Australia.
The spokesperson also said that the change was aimed to increase the chance of intercepting illegal porn.
However Sex Party President Fiona Patten says the change was "sneaked through" by the Minister for Home Affairs, Brendan O'Connor.
"How can the Minister call this monstrous invasion of people's privacy and the criminalisation of hundreds of thousands of people who will answer 'no' to this question out of embarrassment, a 'minor' or 'machinery' change?" Ms Patten said.
Ms Patten also questioned whether these searches are appropriate and demanded an inquiry into the change.
"Is it fair that customs officers rummage through someone's luggage and pull out a legal men's magazine or a lesbian journal in front of their children or their mother-in-law?" Ms Patten said.
"If you and your partner have filmed or photographed yourselves making love in an exotic destination or even taking a bath, you will have to answer 'yes' to the question or you will be breaking the law."
Ms Patten said that many travellers will be embarrassed by having their pornography searched.
"How can the Minister call this monstrous invasion of people's privacy and the criminalisation of hundreds of thousands of people who will answer 'no' to this question out of embarrassment, a 'minor' or 'machinery' change?"
Mr O'Connor could not be reached for comment.