The Queen v Abdirahman-Khalif

The case of *The Queen v Abdirahman-Khalif* involved an appeal to the High Court of Australia concerning a conviction for intentionally being a member of a terrorist organisation, contrary to section 102.3(1) of the *Criminal Code* (Cth). The respondent had been convicted of this offence, but her conviction was subsequently quashed by the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia. The appeal to the High Court centred on whether the evidence adduced at trial was sufficient to sustain the conviction, specifically in light of the Full Court's finding that the Crown had failed to establish the process by which the organisation recruited, inducted, and accepted members.

The legal issues before the High Court included whether the Crown was required to present evidence detailing the recruitment and induction processes of the terrorist organisation, and whether the trial judge had misdirected the jury regarding the physical and mental elements of the offence, leading to an unbalanced summing up. The definition of "member" under section 102.1 of the *Criminal Code* was also relevant, as it included persons who had taken steps to become a member of an organisation.

The High Court allowed the appeal, finding that the majority of the Full Court had erred in their assessment of the evidence. The Court clarified that the offence under section 102.3(1) requires proof that the person intentionally is a member of an organisation, that the organisation is a terrorist organisation, and that the person knows it is a terrorist organisation. The Court held that the evidence, including the respondent's possession of extremist material and her actions indicating an intent to travel to territory controlled by Islamic State, was capable of sustaining a conviction, even without explicit evidence of a formal membership process. The Court reasoned that the definition of "member" encompassed preparatory or anticipatory acts, and that the absence of a formal constitution or rules of membership did not preclude a finding of membership.

Consequently, the High Court set aside the orders of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia and ordered that the respondent's appeal against her conviction be dismissed.