Australia’s biggest newspaper publisher and the media union have warned the government against elements of a planned new national security bill that could allow journalists to be jailed for reporting disclosures about spy operations.



News Corp Australia and the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA) raised concerns that the way the bill was drafted could allow the prosecution of journalists if they revealed information about “special intelligence operations”.

Labor and the Greens also called on the government to make changes if the legislation would criminalise reporting by journalists who receive intelligence information.

Despite prime minister Tony Abbott calling on journalists to display “a sense of responsibility” over their reporting, Liberal senator Cory Bernardi acknowledged concerns about “government and their snooping ability” and said authorities must make sure "we don't overstep the mark”.

The bill presented to the Senate on Wednesday would expand the powers of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (Asio) as part of a suite of national security reforms and would create a new offence punishable by five years in jail for “any person” who disclosed information relating to “special intelligence operations”.

The person would be liable for a 10-year term if the disclosure would “endanger the health or safety of any person or prejudice the effective conduct of a special intelligence operation”.

Special intelligence operations would be a new type of covert operation in which intelligence officers received immunity from liability or prosecution where they may need to engage in conduct that would be otherwise unlawful.

Two criminal law barristers, Greg Barns and Shane Prince, told Guardian Australia on Wednesday the new offences could allow the prosecution and jailing of journalists who received disclosures about such operations and reported them.

The attorney general, George Brandis, said it was not the purpose of the bill to restrict freedom of expression.

News Corp, which led a vocal protest against the Gillard government’s ill-fated media reforms on the basis of free speech, issued a statement late on Thursday outlining its concerns with the security bill.

“No News Corporation editor would seek to undermine nationally important security operations or endanger those involved, and our publications have a long history of showing the kind of responsibility the prime minister talks about,” said the editorial director, Campbell Reid.

“That said, any legislation that even unintentionally curtails freedom of speech or opens the door for journalists to be jailed for doing their job will be opposed.

“There must be no confusion between what these laws intend and what they actually allow in terms of pursuit or punishment of journalists.

“In our long experience frank conversations between security officials and editors about the sensitivity of certain operations has always led to a reasoned outcome and we much prefer for that kind of dialogue in special circumstances than have laws imposed … that restrict the free flow of information.”

The national secretary of the MEAA, Chris Warren, said he was “very concerned about these new laws”.

“There are two real concerns. The [Edward] Snowden revelations show how important it is for whistleblowers to be able to come forward. It could also criminalise ordinary work by journalists in a way that really hasn’t been the case before in Australian law.

“Arguably it would criminalise the reporting of the Snowden revelations if that happened in Australia and it could criminalise the information that has emerged publicly as a result of that.”

Brandis sought to allay the concerns, saying journalists were “not the target of these laws” and the provisions were similar to existing laws for Australian Federal Police “controlled operations”.

“It has been a feature of our law for several years now and the purpose of the section which has attracted some adverse [comment] by some journalists is merely a replication to Asio operations of those existing provisions,” Brandis told the ABC.

But Barns said there were several differences between the federal police controlled operation provisions and the new intelligence operation measures, including significantly longer jail terms under the Asio bill.

The offences relating to the unauthorised disclosure of information are outlined in section 35P of the national security legislation amendment bill which Brandis presented to parliament on Wednesday.

Bernardi told the National Press Club the security reforms were a “work in progress” and he believed Brandis was “very receptive to concerns of those who are libertarians, or conservative libertarians, and that don't want to see an all-pervasive government”.

“Let's go back to first principles. One, I think the Australian public and right around the world are right to be suspicious of government and their snooping ability, if I can put it like that,” Bernardi said. “Look at what's happened in Germany, with the NSA in America, across Europe there's been a lot of discussion in this area.

“Secondly, I think we're right to advocate for freedom of the press. We need to make sure the press are free to report within the constraints of what is in, I'd say, the national interest.

“We all know that there are things the press don't report because of security concerns. We have to be reliant on that. People have gone to jail to protect their sources before in the press.”

The bill’s explanatory memorandum, in a section on the freedom of expression implications, said the offences would not prevent a person from disclosing information to the inspector general of intelligence and security, an oversight agency.

The document said the offences were necessary to protect persons participating in special intelligence operations “and to ensure the integrity of operations, by creating a deterrent to unauthorised disclosures, which may place at risk the safety of participants or the effective conduct of the operation”.

Parliament will debate the bill after the winter recess, with a report to be prepared by the joint committee on intelligence and security. The Greens senator Scott Ludlam criticised Labor for not supporting his motions to provide additional scrutiny on the bill.