NEWS/OPINION | 8 September 2026 | By COURAGE IS THE CURE
A Victorian Children’s Court magistrate found that AFP undercover officers encouraged an autistic 13‑year‑old boy’s fixation on Islamic State after his parents went to authorities seeking help. Deputy Commissioner Ian McCartney later defended the operation in Senate Estimates, calling it “a decision I didn’t take lightly.”
On 5 February 2024, Greens Senator David Shoebridge questioned the AFP in Senate Estimates and accused the agency of “radicalising” the child, who had an IQ of 71, describing the operation as an “obscene abuse of power.”
Video 9/2/24 Senator Shoebridge https://x.com/RobynRJS/status/2097331529240428990?s=20
This case is a clear example of how covert policing powers can go wrong — especially when vulnerable people are involved. And it matters now more than ever, because the federal government is pushing the Digital Duty of Care Amendment Bill, which expands surveillance, behavioural‑nudging requirements, and even allows ‘researchers’ to run covert sock‑puppet accounts online.
Supporters say the Bill will “keep Australians safe.” But the AFP’s treatment of this autistic boy shows how easily covert interventions can escalate harm instead of preventing it.
The Bill would formalise and widen these powers, giving ‘researchers’ more freedom to monitor, influence, and impersonate Australians online — with minimal transparency and limited oversight.
The warning is simple: If authorities could misjudge a single covert operation so badly that a magistrate ruled they encouraged a child’s extremist fixation, what happens when those same powers are expanded, digitised, and applied to millions of people?
Without strong safeguards, the Digital Duty of Care Bill risks creating a system where the next “mistake” isn’t one vulnerable teenager — it’s everyone, inside a national digital enforcement regime that operates out of sight and beyond accountability.
Please like and share, your support is vital !!!!!