Treason laws must be refined

ASIO’s assessment that the prevalence of foreign interference and espionage in Australia is greater now than during the Cold War points to the need for more apposite treason laws that criminalise intrusions into our national life by foreign powers. The Turnbull government must be wary of unintended consequences, however. Attorney-General Christian Porter has been slow to take the point, but as they stand, the proposed amendments to national security legislation could even work against security by undermining the ability of news media to report matters of public interest.

Media companies including News Corp Australia, publisher of The Australian, point out that the new laws could, in theory, see journalists, ­editorial support staff and lawyers jailed for up to 15 years for possessing classified ­information, even before publishing it. The argument that governments with common sense and goodwill would not misuse the legislation to launch vexatious litigation against media companies out of favour with one side of politics or the other is hardly reassuring.

Mr Porter said yesterday that it was “not the intent” of the government to criminalise normal journalism, and he did not accept that it was a “likely outcome” of the legislation. In the heat of politics, however, possibly under a future, less responsible government, it would be what is written in the legislation that would count — not the original intention.

Another problem with the legislation is its vagueness. It is not clear, as News Corp’s head of government affairs Georgia-Kate Schubert points out, whether it applies to digital platforms. If not, the legislation creates an uneven commercial playing field, potentially burdening traditional media companies with extra compliance and litigation costs. At a time when the traditional media is struggling to compete against digital giants such as Google and Facebook, the unintended consequences of the legislation could be the loss of Australian media voices, including smaller regional newspapers or radio stations, through extra business costs and the loss of advertising revenue. Foreign businesses or governments wishing to advertise for the purpose of influencing Australian government policy would be more likely to favour unregulated platforms.

Although Mr Porter says he is open to amending the secrecy and espionage laws, he told The Australian in an interview yesterday that he had ruled out “sweeping, blanket exemptions for a variety of professions”, including journalists, academics and lawyers. He needs to go back to the drawing board and work his way around the pitfalls of the present overly broad-brush approach that would potentially stifle the flow of collaborative university research as well as newsworthy information. Stifling and censoring a free press is not the way to improve national security.