This investigation into Customs’ use of coercive powers found that it is generally consistent with principles of good administration but improvement could be made in several areas.

Complaints have been received from travellers about their experiences with Customs officers, showing individuals often do not know why they’ve been searched, or are left wondering if the officer acted within their power.

A Customs officer may examine items found in luggage such as diaries, notebooks, laptops, cameras and other electronic storage devices. In some circumstances documents might be copied – for example, mobile phone content may be downloaded.

This report describes one case study where a man was questioned about his accommodation in his country of origin, who he lived with, details of their relationship and whether he was married – which did not relate so much to the ‘carriage of prohibited goods’, as to whether his story stood up to the officer’s scrutiny. He complained to the Ombudsman that the questioning had been unduly invasive and personal, and that his reluctance to answer was interpreted by the Customs officer as if he had something to hide, which led to more questioning.

The Ombudsman’s investigation into Customs’ use of coercive powers found that it is generally consistent with principles of good administration but improvement could be made in some areas such as:

• the relevance of questions asked and documents copied
• the timeliness of the return of personal possessions after forensic examination
• record keeping and transparency of administration
• providing information to the public on passenger processing.

The Australian Customs and Border Protection Service responded positively to the majority of the report’s 10 recommendations and is addressing the issues raised.