Login
LCA welcomes proposed amendments to controversial espionage laws
Concerns raised by the legal profession on proposed espionage and foreign interference laws have been heard, with the federal government moving to modify the legislation.
Emma Musgrave
The Law Council of Australia has welcomed reports that the federal government is moving to alter its proposed espionage and foreign interference laws in line with some of the concerns raised by the legal profession and others, calling it a “positive first step”.
To continue reading the rest of this article, please log in.
Create free account to get unlimited news articles and more!
The controversial laws were said to draw a myriad of problems for both the legal profession and other industries, including the potential for the measures to have a “chilling effect on public policy dialogue”.
The LCA and other industry bodies spoke up about their concerns, prompting the government to introduce proposed amendments for the espionage and foreign interference laws.
According to reports, the LCA noted, the government proposes to “narrow definitions applying to Commonwealth officers to ‘conduct that would cause harm to Australia's interests’, as well as the definitions of harmful information; narrow the offence applied to non-Commonwealth officers to only be applicable to ‘the most serious and dangerous’ conduct; and allow journalists to defend their reporting on the basis that they ‘reasonably believe’ it was in the public interest, and not a requirement to prove it was ‘fair and accurate’.”
LCA president Morry Bailes explained that while the legal body needs to thoroughly review the government’s proposed changes, the reported shift is a step in the right direction.
“The Law Council’s greatest concern is with the depth and breadth of the provisions and the unintended consequences that flow from them,” Mr Bailes said.
“Although these amendments do not allay all of the Law Council’s concerns, and more work is certainly needed, these initial amendments all appear to be positive.
“The government’s intention to narrow some of the critical definitions is particularly welcome and something that the Law Council has strongly recommended.”
Mr Bailes added that the LCA also supports attempts to narrow the scope of laws in relation to non-Commonwealth officers.
“However, it is essential that there be an express ‘harm’ requirement inserted into the legislation, to absolutely ensure that the offences only apply to the most serious and dangerous conduct,” he said.
“We still have a considerable way to go and we look forward to continuing to work closely with government, and Parliament, to get these important measures right.”
