Laws chill reporting Fall short of standards

AUSTRALIAN laws protecting the public’s right to know fall well short of international standards, are “chilling” investigative reports, and are making Australia stand “out for the wrong reasons” on the world stage, legal experts told a federal inquiry yesterday.

The Senate Press Freedom Inquiry heard calls for changes to whistleblower protections, a public interest defence for people accused of exposing sensitive information, and reform to warrants issued to media organisations.

But many of the calls were rejected by Australia’s security agencies, which argued they could introduce “vulnerabilities” into our legal system, even though they had been successfully used overseas in countries including New Zealand and the United Kingdom.

The inquiry follows Australian Federal Police raids on the ABC’s Sydney office and the home of News Corp journalist Annika Smethurst in June, which were condemned worldwide.

International human rights lawyer Caoilfhionn Gallagher told the inquiry’s second public hearing that Australia’s lack of protection for public interest journalism had meant that the country was “standing out for the wrong reasons” and raised concerns that laws did not meet international standards.

“We’re very concerned (Australia’s) disclosure offences do not meet the international requirements on freedom of expression,” Ms Gallagher said. “We think they constitute disproportionate interference with the right to freedom of expression.”

But some Federal Government officials outright rejected suggestions to change the laws, including ASIO intelligence service delivery deputy director-general Heather Cook who told senators that protecting journalists could give rise to more foreign spies.