Australian spying named and shamed
10 February 2015 | Michael Kandelaars
http://m.redflag.org.au/article/australian-spying-named-and-shamed

The Liberals’ new anti-terror laws and plan for mass internet surveillance have 
earned Australia a place on the watch list of global human rights violators.

Not the first time, the World Report 2015, published by Human Rights Watch, has 
listed Australia for multiple abuses including the indefinite detention of 
refugees, the 10-12 year life expectancy gap of Indigenous people and now for 
its crackdown on civil liberties.

The Australian director of Human Rights Watch, Elaine Pearson, stated: 
“Australia’s new counterterrorism laws mean journalists, whistleblowers, and 
activists will risk prison for certain disclosures – even if it’s in the public 
interest.”

Under new laws listed in the ASIO Act, it is now an offence to make 
“unauthorised disclosures of information related to special intelligence 
operations”. Australian journalists, or whistleblowers such as Edward Snowden, 
now face up to 10 years in prison. One of the most intrusive laws gives police 
and ASIO the right to access a limitless number of computers on a “network” 
with a single warrant. The broad use of the term “network” in effect means that 
any computer in Australia connected to the internet can now be monitored, 
seized and searched.

One of the most controversial elements of the Liberals’ agenda is Malcolm 
Turnbull and attorney general George Brandis’ plan for retaining metadata. 
Human Rights Watch’s report singled out the government for its “proposed 
additional measures that would force telecommunications companies to retain 
metadata for a period of two years so Australian intelligence organizations can 
access the data”.

If the Liberals manage to push this through, the full metadata records of every 
Australian will be stored for at least two years. Which websites you visit, who 
you email, what you search for, who you call – all of this could be stored. In 
December, Australian ISPs were asked the cost of implementing such a scheme, 
and the additional cost if this timeframe were increased to three years. 
Whether this is what the government will propose is unclear.

In a 2014 National Press Club address, then ASIO head David Irvine warned 
against too much critical discussion of these proposals. He stressed that we 
must “avoid paranoia, including evoking the spectre of Big Brother, 1984, mass 
surveillance and mass violations of privacy”. But this is exactly what is 
happening.

With or without Turnbull and Brandis’s metadata retention scheme, data are 
currently retained and accessed by governments – just for shorter periods of 
time. In 2013-14, more than 500,000 requests for metadata were made to 
Australian telecommunications companies. That number doesn’t include ASIO 
requests.

But don’t take my word for it. Irvine was incredibly blunt when he boasted: “We 
have been using metadata, as it seems to be called these days, for many years … 
[we] use it as frequently as any of us in the old days used to go and look up a 
telephone book.”

He then warned the government that if it changed the law to require warrants to 
access metadata, “not only is ASIO going to come to a halt but all the law 
enforcement in Australia is going to come to a halt”.

Straight from the horse’s mouth.


I write books. http://janwhitaker.com/?page_id=8

Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
[email protected]
Twitter: <https://twitter.com/JL_Whitaker>JL_Whitaker
Blog: www.janwhitaker.com 

Sooner or later, I hate to break it to you, you're gonna die, so how do you 
fill in the space between here and there? It's yours. Seize your space. 
~Margaret Atwood, writer 

_ __________________ _
_______________________________________________
Link mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Reply via email to