TJ Ryan Foundation Research Associate, AJ Brown, writes in The Conversation (13.8.19) that Australian laws make it inevitable for whistleblowers to be charged whenever national security might be involved, even when the information is in the public interest.
‘Never has the case for law reform to properly protect public-interest whistleblowers been so stark. Today, the public hearings into press freedom begin, following the “seismic” raids on media organisations in early June.’A broader Senate inquiry into protecting public whistleblowing is hot on its heels. This builds on a 2017 parliamentary inquiry, which recommended reforms only partially implemented.
‘Yesterday, a crowdfunding campaign for Richard Boyle’s legal defence was launched. Boyle is charged with 66 offences for disclosing concerns about oppressive debt collection by the Australian Taxation Office in Adelaide.
‘What’s more, the unknown Australian Secret Intelligence Service agent “Witness K” last week pleaded guilty to exposing secrets by revealing Australia bugged Timor Leste government buildings during treaty negotiations in 2004.
‘… The trouble is, Australian laws make it inevitable for whistleblowers to be charged whenever national security might be involved – even when, in theory, they’re intended to protect public interest whistleblowing.’
- From Richard Boyle and Witness K to media raids: it’s time whistleblowers had better protection »
- ATO whistleblower Richard Boyle to launch crowdfunding campaign to defend legal case »
- ABC chair Ita Buttrose condemns AFP raid, vows to fight attempts to ‘muzzle’ broadcaster »
- Australia’s quest for national security is undermining the courts and could lead to secretive trials »
- How to restore public confidence in Commonwealth whistleblower protection »
- Concrete action rather than nice words are needed on press freedom »
- Whistleblower protections ‘a sham’, says lawyer whose leaks led to ABC raids »
- Blowing the whistle on alleged wrongdoing should not destroy your life »
- ‘The quiet person you pass on the street’: Secret prisoner Witness J revealed »
- The High Court rules in favour of News Corp, but against press freedom »
- Coalition spends $2m on prosecution of Bernard Collaery and Witness K, even before trial »
- Open justice v secrecy: what is the case against Witness K lawyer Bernard Collaery all about? »
- Labor government urged to drop prosecutions against whistleblowers and ramp up protections »
- Twist in East Timor spying saga as pursuit of whistleblower lawyer dropped »
- Dreyfus ends prosecution of lawyer over alleged leaking about Australian spying in against Timor-Leste »
- Justice finally arrives for Bernard Collaery but damage has already been done »
- Tax office whistleblowing saga points to reforms needed in three vital areas »
- How and why Australian whistleblowing laws need an overhaul: new report »
- Commonwealth spends more than $7.6 million in prosecuting whistleblowers including Bernard Collaery, David McBride and Richard Boyle »
- Whistleblowers must not be sacrificed on the altar of law
- What does an ex-soldier’s war crime charge mean for whistleblowers?
- Richard Boyle faces life behind bars while those in the PwC scandal are protected by the corporate world
- Whistleblowing laws are fundamentally flawed, former judge Tony Fitzgerald says
- Australia’s federal whistleblowing laws have not protected anyone since inception, analysis shows
- Prosecution of ATO whistleblower Richard Boyle is ‘insanity’, says taxpayer he helped
- The ASIC Senate Inquiry delivers a reminder that whistleblowers should be protected, not punished
Why Bernard Collaery’s case is one of the gravest threats to freedom of expression
Spencer Zifcak writes in The Conversation (3.7.20) about how Witness K and his lawyer, Bernard Collaery, are accused of disclosing information related to a covert ASIS spying operation. The author argues that the legal issues likely to be raised at trial present a serious threat to whistleblowing and freedom of expression in Australia.
‘After a lengthy delay due to the coronavirus pandemic, the legal case that constitutes the most significant threat to freedom of expression in this country will soon play out in the ACT Supreme Court.
‘This is the prosecution of Bernard Collaery, the former ACT attorney-general and lawyer for Witness K, the former ASIS officer turned whistleblower.
‘Both are charged under section 39 of the Intelligence Services Act 2001, which deems it a criminal offence for a person to communicate any information that was prepared by the Australian Secret Intelligence Service in pursuit of its functions.
‘After an ACT Supreme Court ruling last week, significant parts of the trial against Collaery will now be held in secret, but the argument put forward by the attorney-general that certain information in the case must be kept classified is extraordinarily weak.
‘… A conviction in these circumstances would be a travesty, particularly as it carries with it a maximum sentence of two years imprisonment. This is the penalty Collaery and K are facing.’
- ‘Entirely undemocratic’: Bernard Collaery to challenge secrecy orders »
- Why Bernard Collaery’s case is one of the gravest threats to freedom of expression »
- Witness K’s lawyer wins transparency ruling as court cites need to deter ‘political prosecutions’ »
- Witness K should be shown ‘judicial mercy’ not used to deter others, court told »
- Witness K is in the dock but institutions vital to Australia’s democracy are on trial »
- Whistleblowers are being scared into silence, hampering efforts to expose corruption in Australia, research finds »
- Australian intelligence officer’s secret jailing sparks push for minimum level of transparency »
- Australia has prosecuted a brave individual. People who speak up keep getting arrested »
- Rex Patrick launches bid to make government reveal long-secret cabinet documents on Timor-Leste »
- Press freedom, democracy at risk without human rights charter: Human Rights Law Centre »
- ‘Absurd’: lawyers criticise government’s high court bid to keep Collaery decision secret »
- With truth on trial, the Attorney-General’s High Court bid for secrecy is dangerous »
- Bullying the neighbourhood: the show trial of Bernard Collaery and Witness K »
- Top-secret evidence will be allowed in Bernard Collaery’s court case, ACT Supreme Court judge rules »
- Coalition government spent $6m prosecuting Bernard Collaery and three other whistleblowers »
- Mark Dreyfus orders Commonwealth to drop Bernard Collaery East Timor spying charges »
- Justice for Bernard Collaery must be the beginning of decisive action on whistleblowers »
- The unconscionable prosecution of Bernard Collaery was an assault on the values Australia holds dear »
- Timor gaps »
- It is not in the public interest to jail people for telling the truth. Labor must end these whistleblower cases »
- Whistleblower David McBride loses bid to stave off trial over public interest defence
- As whistleblower David McBride pleads guilty, pressure is building on the Albanese government
- David McBride is facing jailtime for helping reveal alleged war crimes. Will it end whistleblowing in Australia?