General Press Release No. 269 (November 2005)

Sedition section must be removed

The Chairman of the Australian Press Council, Professor Ken McKinnon, today called on the Attorney-General to remove the sedition clauses from the revised Anti-Terrorism Bill currently before Parliament.

"Philip Ruddock has already agreed that the sedition section needs review. It is in fact completely anachronistic. If legislation is required to punish incitement to terrorism, they must be in a restricted form that does not adversely affect other areas of freedom of speech or revive eighteenth century authoritarianism, as the current proposal does."

Professor McKinnon said, "Mr Ruddock has said that he will introduce revisions next February. If he is going to change the sedition section then, why introduce such sweeping new offences now?"

He acknowledged the positive changes the government had made to the original draft Bill saying that the revised Anti-Terrorism Bill had been substantially improved, but said, "There are still clauses that constitute a serious threat to free speech".

Professor McKinnon said that, in addition to the thoroughly objectionable sedition clauses, there were other provisions in the Bill that would limit the ability of the press to report matters of public interest and concern. "Independent reporting is prevented by provisions that make it a crime with a penalty of five years jail to report that a person has been detained or, indeed, any information about the event.

"The powers proposed to be conferred will allow the detention of persons, including journalists, to 'preserve' (read 'prevent public knowledge of') evidence relating to a terrorist act. There will be no right for journalists to protect confidential sources.

"Another section, apparently unrelated to terrorism, allows the Federal Police to obtain any documents that they believe relate to the investigation of a 'serious offence'.

"Even without the threat of such a power Australian editors have already experienced heavy-handed police intrusion into newsrooms seeking non-publication, and the surrender, of documents, unrelated to terrorism, that they think might be embarrassing if published. Open-ended legal authority of that kind is wholly undesirable," he said.

"Indeed all of what is supposed to be an emergency Act should be subject a quite short sunset clause so that its continuing necessity can be assessed".

The Press Council says that the three most essential changes now needed in the Bill are:

1. The sedition offences should be removed from the Bill and brought back separately if, after a review, they are thought necessary.
    
2. There should be media-specific exemptions clauses protecting journalists and publishers from arbitrary detention as they go about their essential task of telling us all what is going on (precedents exist for such clauses in the Privacy Act and in corporations law)
    
3. The final Act should have a three-year sunset clause, renewable if and only if exceptional circumstances can be established.

see also
Council's submission on the Anti-Terrorism Bill (No. 2), 2005.

[ return to top ]