Senate bill would ban arms exports linked to genocide risk
Four senators have brought a five-part bill. They are David Pocock, Mehreen Faruqi, Fatima Payman and Lidia Thorpe. Pocock and Thorpe are independents. Faruqi is from the Greens. Payman leads a small party called Australia's Voice. The bill covers selling military goods overseas, investments, company reports and trade with occupied land. It is the Senate copy of a bill already in the House.
Official name: Red Lines Package Omnibus Bill 2026 [No. 2]
- Military goods and services could not be sold overseas if they could help genocide, war crimes or crimes against humanity. Genocide means acts meant to destroy a whole group of people.
- The Future Fund, the government's own big investment fund, would have to sell investments linked to genocide risk or illegal settlements. So would super funds, where people save for retirement, and charities.
- Big companies, unis and the government would have to publish a yearly statement on genocide risk.
- A new Anti-Genocide Commissioner would be set up.
- It would be a crime to bring in or sell goods made by unlawful settlers on occupied land.
Who it affects
- Defence companies and exporters: They could not sell goods overseas that could help a serious breach of world law. They would keep records for 10 years.
- Super fund members and the people who run funds: Those running funds, including people who run their own fund, would have to keep fund money out of illegal settlements and genocide risk.
- Registered charities: They would be struck off the charity list if they put money into banned companies or activities.
- Companies that earn $100 million or more a year: They would have to publish a yearly statement on genocide risk in their business and the firms that supply them.
- Universities: They would have to publish the same yearly statement on genocide risk.
- Importers and shops: Bringing in or selling goods made by unlawful settlers on occupied land would become a crime.
Arms, money and genocide risk
This is a private bill. That means senators brought it, and the government did not write it. Senators David Pocock, Mehreen Faruqi, Fatima Payman and Lidia Thorpe brought it to the Senate on 15 September 2026.
The notes that explain the bill say it is based on the Red Lines Package. That is a set of four planned laws. They aim to make sure Australia does not arm, fund, invest in or profit from serious breaches of world law.
Genocide means acts done to destroy a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, in whole or in part.
Australia signed the Genocide Convention in 1948. It is a deal between countries. Under it, Australia must not commit genocide or help anyone commit it. It must also try to stop it and punish it. The notes say Australian law so far mostly covers the punishing part.
The notes also point to a view given in July 2024 by the International Court of Justice. That is the top court of the United Nations. The United Nations is a group of almost every country in the world.
It found Israel's settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem break world law. These are Palestinian areas held by Israel. It said other countries should avoid trade and investment that help keep the settlements going.
The bill has five parts. It matches a bill Dr Sophie Scamps MP brought to the House of Representatives the day before. She is an independent MP. The House of Representatives is the lower house of Parliament. The two bills come with almost the same notes.
Stopping risky defence exports
Australia controls the sale of weapons and military tech overseas. It does this under the Defence Trade Controls Act 2012. The Defence Minister gives permits for these sales.
The bill would ban any supply of military tech, goods or services that could be, allow or help a serious breach of world law. It lists three such breaches. They are genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.
These are as defined in the Rome Statute. That is the treaty that set up the International Criminal Court. That court tries people for the worst crimes, such as genocide. A treaty is a formal deal between countries.
The minister would have to refuse permits for these sales. The minister would have to cancel or change permits already given.
The ban would also cover sales that do not need a permit today. That includes sales under AUKUS, the defence deal with the United States and the United Kingdom.
The minister would have to keep a public list of supplies and choices. Exporters would have to keep their own records for at least 10 years.
Breaking the rules could lead to fines or criminal charges. The bill says the government and its ministers could be charged too. They could not claim they are protected from the law.
Matching changes to the Customs Act 1901, the law on goods crossing the border, make sure border rules cannot be used to get around the ban.
Selling off certain investments
This part changes the rules for three big pools of money. They are the Future Fund, registered charities and super funds. The Future Fund is the government's own big investment fund.
Each would have to keep its money away from three things. The first is a banned company. That includes companies on a United Nations list of businesses working in settlements on Palestinian land.
The second is illegal settlement activity. The third is any business whose actions may add to the risk of genocide.
They must not put money into these on purpose. They must take all fair steps to avoid it. If they find they already hold such an investment, they must sell it quickly.
The Future Fund would have to say in its yearly report whether it followed the rule.
The charities watchdog is the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission. It would have to strike off any charity that broke the rule.
For super, the duty would cover everyone who runs a fund. That includes people who run their own super fund.
Say your super fund holds shares in a company on the United Nations list. Under this bill, the fund would have to sell those shares.
The notes say that in 2021, the Future Fund was found to hold $158 million in companies directly linked to Myanmar's army.
Yearly genocide risk statements
This part copies the idea of the Modern Slavery Act 2018. Under that law, big companies already report each year on slavery risks among the firms that supply them.
Some groups would have to give the government a yearly statement on genocide. They are companies that earn $100 million or more a year, and defence firms. They also include unis, research bodies, the Future Fund and companies the government owns.
The federal government would publish one statement for all its departments.
Each statement would describe the business and the firms that supply it. It would set out the genocide risks and what the business is doing about them. The board must sign it off. It must not be misleading. Statements would go on a public list.
Businesses that are covered would have a legal duty to check for genocide risk and fix problems. Senior managers would have duties too.
The bill would also make some acts against the law. It would ban taking part in actions that may add to genocide risk. It would ban getting someone else to do so.
Two world courts might find that genocide is happening. They are the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court. If so, the bill treats that as true unless there is strong proof the other way.
Other groups could choose to report, even if they do not have to. The law would be reviewed after three years.
The Anti-Genocide Commissioner
Part 3 also creates an Australian Anti-Genocide Commissioner. This is an official who would work to stop genocide.
The Governor-General, the King's representative, would appoint this official full time for up to five years. The role copies the Anti-Slavery Commissioner set up in 2024.
The official would help businesses spot genocide risks. They would speak up for victims and survivors. They would look into issues. They could order businesses to fix problems.
The official could not look into single cases where genocide is suspected. That stays with police. The office would only start once Parliament sets aside money for it in another law.
Link to spending rules
This short part makes one thing clear. Nothing in the bill beats the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013. That is the main law on how federal money is looked after.
Banning trade with settlements
This part would make it a crime to bring in or sell settlement goods. These are goods made fully or partly in an illegal settlement on occupied land, by an unlawful settler.
Occupied land means land held by a foreign army or government. An unlawful settler is a person from the occupying country who lives there with that country's help.
It would also be a crime to buy or give settlement services. It would be a crime to take natural resources such as oil, minerals or crops from occupied land. Helping someone else do any of these would be a crime too.
The ban would reach Australians and Australian companies acting overseas.
The notes say this does not ban all trade with a country or region. Goods made on occupied land by people who are not unlawful settlers would still be allowed.
The bill lists seven areas of occupied land. The Foreign Minister could add more. These would be based on what world courts and the United Nations have found.
The Federal Court, a national court, could make orders to stop people breaking the rules.
Goods already on the way when the law starts could still come in. Businesses with current contracts would have three months to change or end them.
The Foreign Minister would report to Parliament each year. There would be an outside review after five years.
Say you run a shop that sells wine. A wine might be made by settlers on listed occupied land. You could not bring it in or sell it.
Waiting in the Senate
If passed, most of the law would start the day after it is signed into law. The Anti-Genocide Commissioner would start the day after another law gives money for the office.
The four senators brought the bill to the Senate on 15 September 2026. That day they also started the debate on its main idea.
It is still waiting in the Senate. It would need to pass the Senate and then the House of Representatives to become law.
Private bills often wait a long time. Many never come to a vote. The matching House bill, the Red Lines Package Omnibus Bill 2026, is also still waiting.
How they voted
| Vote | Result |
|---|---|
| Vote to bring it in Senate, 15 September 2026 Labor 21 aye, Liberal 12 no, Greens 9 aye, One Nation 4 aye, Independent 2 aye, LNP 2 no, Australia's Voice 1 aye, United Australia 1 aye, Lambie Network 1 aye | Ayes won 39 to 14 |
Its journey through Parliament
| 15 Sep 2026 | Senate: Introduced and read a first time |
| 15 Sep 2026 | Senate: Second reading moved |