Shadow attorney general also asks why public announcement was made two days after case was reported to the ombudsman

This article is more than 3 years old

This article is more than 3 years old

The shadow attorney general Mark Dreyfus has called on the attorney general, George Brandis, to explain the circumstances of the “shocking” and unlawful access of an Australian journalist’s metadata by the Australian federal police.

On Friday, the AFP commissioner, Andrew Colvin, announced at a media conference that his agency had self-reported a breach of Australian telecommunications laws to the commonwealth ombudsman, having failed to obtain a warrant before accessing a journalist’s phone records.

AFP data breach: six cases of alleged police misconduct investigated Read more

The breach related to an internal AFP investigation into a disclosure of information. Since 2015, agencies that request access to a journalist’s phone or email records must obtain a journalist information warrant, which in this case the agency failed to seek.

While the circumstances of the AFP’s investigation and the identity of the journalist remain unknown at this stage, the breach has drawn swift condemnation from press freedom groups and privacy advocates.

Dreyfus issued a statement and said the breach was “shocking”, taking particular aim at the decision to disclose the breach on a Friday afternoon, two days after the AFP reported the breach to the commonwealth ombudsman.

“While it is a good thing that the AFP self-reported the breach, the fact that it happened at all is clearly unacceptable.”

He said Brandis and the justice minister, Michael Keenan, could not just “handball” the case to the AFP.

Federal police admit to accessing journalist's metadata without a warrant Read more

“Both ministers must explain – when were they notified of the breach, and what immediate action did they take? Is there a legitimate reason for the public announcement being made two days after the breach was reported to the ombudsman?”

The Greens senator Scott Ludlam, who campaigned strongly against the introduction of mandatory two-year data retention laws, said the case raised broader questions about the government’s scheme of access to telecommunications.

The independent senator Nick Xenophon has also voiced strong concerns about the case and has said he will take it in Senate estimates.

