A FREE PRESS CHALLENGED
IMPOSING tougher restrictions on a free press is not the way to boost security.
The old saying that truth is the first casualty in war has been proven correct in numerous conflicts around the globe, and remains relevant amid the paranoia that has gripped Western nations since 9/11 and later, the rise of ISIS.
Several conflicts have involved Australia in roles ranging from “observer’’ to actively putting troops on the ground.
But often, the assault on what the public can be told occurs within our own borders.
As the world has slid into this era of paranoia over terrorism, and we are witnessing that firsthand on the Gold Coast as security is ramped up for the Commonwealth Games, successive governments have introduced tougher laws.
Journalists and news organisations can already find themselves on shaky ground in reporting anti-terror operations. Legislation has made the press role a minefield, and organisations such as the Gold Coast Bulletin, its publisher News Corp and other media companies have long fought to preserve the right of Australians to be informed.
The fourth estate is a vital pillar of democracy. It is press freedom and the ability to keep the public in the loop that guarantees security.
Yet Australia is staring at another bid to ratchet up legislation, based on an ASIO assessment that the prevalence of foreign interference and espionage in Australia is greater now than during the Cold War.
This might well point to a need for more apposite treason laws that criminalise intrusions into our national life by foreign powers. But there has to be concern at unintended consequences. As media companies including News Corp Australia point out, proposed amendments to national security legislation could achieve the opposite and work against security by undermining the media’s ability to report matters of public interest.
In theory, the new laws could lead to journalists, editorial support staff and lawyers being jailed for up to 15 years just for possessing what would be deemed classified information, even before publishing it.
Of course, the Turnbull Government would argue – like previous administrations have – that governments with common sense and goodwill would not misuse legislation. Attorney-General Christian Porter says it is not the intent to criminalise “normal journalism’’ and he does not accept that‘s a “likely outcome’’ of the legislation. That’s hardly an iron-clad guarantee. Media organisations and the public they serve would be more confident if the assurances were stronger or if the Government took steps now to ensure the legislation never made it possible for a future, less responsible government to use the amendments, once law, to put critics behind bars.
News Corp is also concerned at the potential for the legislation to create an uneven commercial playing field that burdens traditional media companies with extra compliance and litigation costs.
In the Bulletin’s view, Mr Porter must reconsider this legislation. While national security is paramount, it is not achieved through amendments that have not been thought through adequately and could censor the free press.