This article is more than 6 years old

This article is more than 6 years old

Australia’s media union has warned the Abbott government’s looming national security changes will have a “chilling effect” on public-interest journalism and expose reporters to legitimate complaints about breaches of their professional ethics.

The Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance has warned the federal parliament’s joint intelligence and security committee the first tranche of the Coalition’s national security reforms will “criminalise journalists and journalism”.

The critique relates to legislation currently before the parliament. This package, introduced to the Senate during the last sitting by the attorney-general, George Brandis, expands the surveillance footprint by giving the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation more capacity to monitor computers and computer networks.

The bill also contains provisions intended to dissuade intelligence agents and contractors – so called “trusted insiders” – from leaking.

It creates a new offence punishable by five years in jail for “any person” who discloses information relating to “special intelligence operations”. The broad wording has prompted legal experts to argue media outlets will also be caught by the new provision, thereby preventing reporting of Edward Snowden-style disclosures.

A submission by Brandis’s department to the intelligence committee has made it clear the purpose of the new provision is to head off a homegrown Edward Snowden or Chelsea Manning; and has also confirmed it will be the attorney general who decides who is prosecuted under the new regime.

But major Australian media companies have already been critical of the proposal, and have indicated they will lobby against it being passed into law.

Guardian Australia, the publisher of this website, has made a submission to the intelligence committee critical of the anti-whistleblowing proposal. A coalition of media organisations under the “Australia’s Right to Know” banner has also made a submission to the intelligence committee inquiry.

The high-powered media group is expected to meet late this week to discuss a range of policies that curb free speech. Right to Know is a coalition of media organisations including News Corp, Fairfax Media, the public broadcasters, the pay TV networks and the commercial broadcasters established in 2007 to lobby in favour of press freedom.

The journalists’ union has also made a submission which is expected to be made public this Friday when the committee meets to begin public hearings on the first tranche of the Coalition’s national security bills.

The MEAA says in its submission the legislation before the parliament will “capture legitimate reporting by journalists and media organisations of activities in the public interest. In doing so, it would criminalise journalists and journalism.”

The union contends the proposed law would have prevented the reporting of efforts by Australian intelligence in 2009 to tap the mobile phone of the Indonesian president.

Guardian Australia revealed in November 2013 that Australia’s spy agencies targeted the mobile phones of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, his wife, and senior ministers and confidants – a disclosure that came from material leaked by the former National Security Agency contractor-turned-whistleblower Snowden.

That disclosure caused a serious rift in diplomatic relations between the newly elected Abbott government and Jakarta. The Indonesian government demanded the two countries negotiate a new protocol governing all future intelligence matters.

The union says the regime being proposed by Brandis undermines the professional requirement that journalists protect their sources, and could also expose reporters to complaints about breaches of ethics.

The concern is journalists may take steps to protect their informants, but the identity of whistleblowers may be discovered by government agencies.

The MEAA says the problems associated with the provision reflect hasty drafting and a lack of consultation about the consequences associated with the reforms. It warns the bill in its current form “will have a chilling effect on legitimate journalism in Australia” and urges parliamentarians to uphold press freedoms as the government works through its proposed changes to national security laws.

The Abbott government has also prompted public controversy with other elements of its proposed terror package.

After first signalling that it would not be an issue for active policy consideration until later in the year, the Abbott government last week abruptly switched course and raised the spectre of a new mandatory data retention regime where phone companies and ISPs would be required to keep records of the private communications of Australians just in case spies or police required access to the material for investigations.

Senior government players then struggled to articulate what aspects of Australians’ private communications data would be held in such a scheme.

The prime minister, Tony Abbott, is currently overseas and is expected to attend meetings in London later this week related to national security issues and counterterrorism measures.

The UK recently implemented a new data retention regime which replaced a 2009 European law scuttled by the European court of justice on privacy grounds. Brandis and two members of parliament’s intelligence committee were in London in July to attend a conference about oversight of intelligence agencies.

The Coalition is also proposing separate legal measures intended to make it easier to detain and prosecute Australians who participate in terrorist activities overseas. Concrete details on these “war zone” policy measures remain somewhat sketchy.

The leader of the opposition, Bill Shorten, was briefed last Friday on the broad direction of the Abbott government’s terrorism package. On Monday Shorten told reporters the opposition was inclined to be constructive on the package, but Labor was also concerned to see appropriate safeguards and privacy protections.

He said it was important to deal with the package in a considered way. “We will walk before we run,” Shorten said.