Antinuclear

Did anything, in particular, spark this?

Media organisations in Australia have long been concerned about threats to journalism, but the issue exploded into the public consciousness following two consecutive police raids earlier this year.

Did anything, in particular, spark this?

Media organisations in Australia have long been concerned about threats to journalism, but the issue exploded into the public consciousness following two consecutive police raids earlier this year.

What was the government’s response?

Prime Minister Scott Morrison and senior colleagues defended the police raids as the independent actions of an agency doing its job to protect national security. They have responded to the broader furore over press freedom by calling a parliamentary inquiry and issuing directives to agencies emphasising the importance of a free press.

The inquiry, conducted by the intelligence and security committee, is examining the impact of national security laws on press freedom. This inquiry has heard from media outlets, government officials and independent experts. It is being conducted alongside a more wide-ranging press freedom inquiry by a Senate committee.

Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton has issued a directive to the federal police stating they should consider the “importance of a free and open press” and broader public-interest implications before involving media outlets in investigations. Attorney-General Christian Porter also instructed Commonwealth prosecutors not to charge journalists under certain secrecy laws without his approval. Porter has said he would be “seriously disinclined” to authorise the prosecutions.

Privately, the Morrison government has indicated a scepticism that media freedom is something that grabs the public’s attention. There is also hostility within the Coalition towards any changes seen as weakening national security. With these political and policy factors in mind, the government does not yet seem convinced of the need for sweeping law reform.

What do the media companies want to achieve?

Australia’s Right to Know coalition has six key proposals for “necessary and urgent” reform. The changes would strengthen rights and protections for public-interest journalism.

• The right to contest search warrants: Applications for search warrants to be made to a high-level judge, with the relevant media outlet to be notified and given the opportunity to challenge the warrant.
• Protections for whistleblowers: Expanded safeguards for government whistleblowing, including an expanded public interest test. The outlets want to see a culture of secrecy replaced with a culture of disclosure.
• Restrictions on secrecy: New rules governing what information governments can deem secret, with obligations to regularly audit the material being kept from the public.
• Freedom of information reform: A suite of changes to FOI law to reduce and restrict the significant delays, obstacles, cost and exemptions that allow government agencies to prevent disclosure.
• Journalist exemptions: Exemptions to protect journalists from prosecution under a number of national security laws. Media outlets can currently mount legal defences against charges under these laws but want this strengthened to exemptions for public-interest journalism.
• Defamation law reform: Overhaul of defamation law to adapt to the digital era, address inconsistency across states territories, and ensure it is operating as intended.
  The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age, formerly owned by Fairfax Media and now Nine, have a long history of significant investigative journalism. This work has regularly come into conflict with the authorities, and journalists have faced police raids, punishment of whistleblowers and restrictive FOI processes.In 2010, The Age revealed that the Victorian Labor Party held sensitive personal information about voters without their knowledge. This reporting was based on information from the party’s database, which the reporters had accessed. Victorian police later obtained warrants to search the journalists’ digital and hard copy files. If The Age had the ability to challenge the warrants, the lawyers may have been able to restrict police access to the reporters’ computers.In April 2012, investigative journalist Chris Vedelago submitted a FOI request to the Foreign Investment Review Board for documents relating to the approval of a vast tract of agricultural land to a Canadian company. The board rejected the request as not in the public interest. Vedelago appealed the decision to the independent information commissioner, who didn’t make a decision until November 2014. The documents that were ultimately released were of little value because so much information was redacted.

  In 2018, a joint investigation by Fairfax Media and the ABC’s Four Corners uncovered the Australian Taxation Office’s mistreatment of taxpayers. The information was revealed by ATO whistleblower Richard Boyle. He has now been charged with 66 offences and faces 161 years in prison……..

• The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age, formerly owned by Fairfax Media and now Nine, have a long history of significant investigative journalism. This work has regularly come into conflict with the authorities, and journalists have faced police raids, punishment of whistleblowers and restrictive FOI processes.In 2010, The Age revealed that the Victorian Labor Party held sensitive personal information about voters without their knowledge. This reporting was based on information from the party’s database, which the reporters had accessed. Victorian police later obtained warrants to search the journalists’ digital and hard copy files. If The Age had the ability to challenge the warrants, the lawyers may have been able to restrict police access to the reporters’ computers.In April 2012, investigative journalist Chris Vedelago submitted a FOI request to the Foreign Investment Review Board for documents relating to the approval of a vast tract of agricultural land to a Canadian company. The board rejected the request as not in the public interest. Vedelago appealed the decision to the independent information commissioner, who didn’t make a decision until November 2014. The documents that were ultimately released were of little value because so much information was redacted.

  In 2018, a joint investigation by Fairfax Media and the ABC’s Four Corners uncovered the Australian Taxation Office’s mistreatment of taxpayers. The information was revealed by ATO whistleblower Richard Boyle. He has now been charged with 66 offences and faces 161 years in prison.   https://www.theage.com.au/national/a-culture-of-secrecy-what-is-the-right-to-know-campaign-about-20191018-p5323v.html