Australia's freedom of speech strangled by Coalition forces

Australia's Liberal and National parties are proud to profess their loyalty to freedom of speech at any opportunity. They insist that this is now a substantive point of distinction between them and their 'radical' opponents on the left. But behind cosmetic, rhetorical advocacy for freedom of speech, Coalition governments have been devoted to strangling it in Australia. The recent arrest of Friendlyjordies' producer, Kristo Langker, however shocking, is a natural step in Australia’s long-running assault on good journalism. The hypocrisy of state and federal governments in on this issue is deplorable. 

Of course, nothing is absolute, and freedom of speech is no exception. Speech exists within certain bounds, and we all draw those lines in different places. Australia has many laws restricting speech, those defending workers from bullying in workplaces and those protecting against racial discrimination are but two examples. However, some fundamental principles necessary for democracy are that speech which criticises elected officials, governments, and the state is properly protected, and that whistle-blowers who leak public-interest material are protected too. But for Coalition parties, the bounds and limits on freedom of speech appear to be drawn wherever and whenever their own credibility and competence comes into disrepute. That is to say, whenever journalists do their most basic duty: hold power to account. However, in Australia this rare breed of journalism has been met with authoritarian retaliation, particularly over the last few years.

It's transparent that to current Coalition governments, state and federal, the principle of free speech is interpreted as the freedom from accountability and criticism. We saw this when the PM resisted calls to reprimand Craig Kelly for his propagation of inaccurate and dangerous information on COVID-19 and vaccinations. Similarly, after MP George Christiansen baselessly claimed the 2020 US election was stolen from Trump, Morrison responded generally that "Australia is a free country. There’s such a thing as freedom of speech in this country and that will continue." In the end Kelly became a political liability, and he slid over to the crossbench. But that didn't change the fact that critics of elected officials have been falsely charged with mounting attacks on freedom of speech. In a shameless act of hypocrisy, and in spite of their free speech virtue-signalling, Coalition leaders are regularly exploiting their power to sue, suppress, and have arrest anyone who earnestly attempts to expose their historic, ongoing, or prospective crimes. Hence, raids, arrests, and the prosecution of journalists over the time of this federal government have been tacitly endorsed with chilling uniformity. 

There are countless cases over the past 20 years of Australia attacking journalists for doing their job. One such instance requires some context. In 2004, during the redrawing of territorial boundaries between Australia and Timor-Leste, Australia illegally bugged the Timorese parliament. Then-Prime Minister John Howard and his Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer, had the Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS) spy on the sovereign nation. They did so to secure the edge in oil and gas treaty negotiations which would redraw maritime boundaries. The prize was the abundant gas and oil fields under the Timor Sea which Australia tricked Timor-Leste into giving up. Our Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) erroneously classified lucrative helium reserves under the Timor Sea as 'waste products'. Naively, but understandably, the "under-resourced" Timorese accepted this accounting trick, assuming Australia was negotiating in good faith. Australia won big. In reality, the Howard government and DFAT had just one thing in mind: enriching large resources companies like "the main financial beneficiary" of the negotiations, Woodside Petroleum. As Michael West journalist, Cullum Foote documents, following the bad-faith negotiations, DFAT Secretary, Ashton Calvert was appointed to the board of Woodside just 7 months after departing the bureaucracy. At that same time, Alexander Downer went on to become a petroleum lobbyist, and consulted on behalf of Woodside Petroleum. Dave Sharma and Josh Frydenberg worked as advisors to Downer and Howard respectively during the negotiations, and are now prominent MPs in the Federal government.

 

Collaery and Porter

 

In 2013, an ASIS official known only as Witness K was about to testify to The Hague about Australia’s spying operation in Timor-Leste. But before he could his house was raided by ASIO, he was arrested, and his Australian passport was cancelled. Both he and his lawyer, Bernard Collaery face court for blowing the whistle. This has become standard operating procedure in Australia. Public-interest journalism exposing abuses of power is frequently stamped out. In an additional act undermining democratic norms, the then-Attorney General Christian Porter has succeeded in his push for parts of the trial to be held in secret. Independent journalist, Michael West has also documented that Porter broke the law and abused process in order to muzzle K and Collaery.

 

This is just one case among many. Of course, there's the outstanding neglect of Julian Assange, who successive governments, Labor and Liberal, have failed to protect. But in addition, in 2017, whistleblower Richard Boyle was criminally charged, and could even face life in prison, for revealing that the ATO was using an “aggressive form” of debt retrieval wherein the tax office could pillage citizen’s bank accounts with no regard for individuals’ financial circumstances. News Corps’ Annika Smethurst was arrested in June of 2019 for leaking e-mails which revealed plans for the Australian Signals Directorate to be empowered to spy on citizens at the discretion of a couple of frontbench ministers. Officers rifled through Smethurst’s underwear drawer in a 7-hour raid, the warrant for which was later ruled invalid by the High Court. The charges against Smethurst were later dropped, but the message to journalists and the public was clear: if you leak or publish public-interest material the state and law enforcement will hound you and suppress your freedom of speech.

 

The same message was sent to the ABC, when its offices were raided after their special report, Afghan Files, which detailed war crimes carried out by Australia’s defence force. For a time, 2GB’s Ben Fordham was warned that he may become part of an AFP investigation, after broadcasting that “up to six illegal boats” were headed to Australia. Within hours of the broadcast the Department of Home Affairs had begun investigating the source of the leak. In stark contrast, only months later the AFP dropped an investigation into a source who leaked “Cabinet-level advice” to the media. The leak documented internal concerns that a bill granting refugees in offshore detention medical treatment could kickstart the people-smuggler trade. As Opposition Leader, Anthony Albanese said, the “the usual suspects” (a.k.a senior Coalition operatives) leaked the material because it supported their opposition to the Labor-crossbench Medevac bill. It’s evident from the contrast between this episode and the prompt and tenacious pursuit of Fordham’s source that not all leaks are created equal. Leaks perpetrated by government officials, and which support the Coalition’s agenda are sanctioned and the sources protected. Whereas those which oppose the government are considered criminal, and are to be attacked by any means available. Whilst the Department of Home Affairs can make politically advantageous leaks to its stenographers at The Australian with impunity, genuine whistleblowers don't enjoy such protections.

 

These cases clearly represent a concerted effort by governments, in concert with law enforcement and intelligence agencies, to crack down on freedom of speech, but they’re also a part of another worrying trend. Essential democratic norms and principles such as the presumption of innocence are being eroded by the current federal government. PM Morrison has censured those calling for an independent inquiry into whether or not Christian Porter is fit to remain Attorney General following the detailed sexual assault allegations levelled against him. The terms of reference for such an inquiry would direct it to answer whether or not Porter still maintains the public’s trust, and whether or not he remains ‘beyond reproach’, as has historically been the standard for the highest law officer of the land. The government falsely claims that backers of an inquiry are subverting the presumption of innocence and the ‘rule of law’. In reality it is Coalition governments who are presiding over such a subversion. And they've just taken another major step in advancing this agenda. 

 

Kristo departs court with lawyer, Mark Davis.

Recently, comedian and journalist, Jordan Shanks, a.k.a Friendlyjordies, revealed that his producer, Kristo Langker, was arrested on the 4th of June. As Shanks put it: “plain clothed, armed officers stormed into” Langker’s home, “violently assaulted his family, nearly killed his dog, pinned him to the ground, handcuffed him, and dragged him into an unmarked police car.” Kristo’s video evidence of the arrest, which is included in the Friendly Jordies video, appears to corroborate these claims. And video evidence of the inciting incident appears to refute the criminal charges laid against Langker. He is charged with stalking and harassing the Deputy Premier of NSW, the Nationals’ John Barilaro, at a state funeral, as well as at a public event hosted by Barilaro (see here). As you’ll see in Langker’s phone footage of the exchange which prompted his arrest, it suggests Barilaro’s statement to the police is inaccurate. All Langker appears to do is approach Barilaro for a discussion about Barilaro’s ongoing defamation lawsuit against Shanks. Langker never calls Barilaro “corrupt” as is claimed in the police statement.

 

Shockingly, it was the NSW police's anti-terror, Fixated Persons unit who were sent to arrest Langker. Unfortunately this is congruent with worrying trends in the USA. Following concerns over the January insurrection, the Biden administration has accelerated plans to counter 'domestic terrorist extremists', which includes those who "who violently oppose all forms of capitalism, corporate globalization, and governing institutions, which they perceive as harmful to society". These broad criteria open the door to the arbitrary classification of domestic dissenters as 'terrorists', just as many foreign actors have been so categorised in America's disastrous 'War on Terror'. Incidentally it was as part of this ‘War’ that Obama famously abandoned the presumption of innocence for US citizens designated by the executive as terrorists, some of whom were murdered in US airstrikes. Back in NSW, the objectives of the Fixated Persons Investigations Unit were described by Police Chief, Mick Fuller, as involving the targeting of citizens who are "obsessed about issues, ideals or individuals” and who are “plotting acts of violence” or “capable of acts of terrorism”. Once again, a definition so broad as to implicate whoever is deemed unacceptably honest or principled. Any impassioned citizen, journalist or otherwise, who has a dedicated interest in national affairs can be classed as a ‘fixated person’ at risk of domestic terror. In Langker's case, literally within hours of running into Barilaro on his way to University, the Deputy Premier lodged a police statement and mobilised the Fixated Persons unit to arrest a 21-year-old. And importantly – though no one should be subject to such treatment - Langker is a journalist with a NSW press pass.

 

All this started after Shanks devoted various videos to exposing Barilaro’s shady dealings. In response, Barilaro set out to sue Shanks for defamation, claiming his videos were racist and offensive. Regardless of what you think of Shanks’ defence of his mocking Italian-mafioso accent, and his depictions of Barilaro as Mario, it’s clear that Shanks’ videos represent a genuine threat to the Deputy Premier's reputation. This is because they document various corrupt dealings, for example when Barilaro and his family debt-trapped an Italian club in Queanbeyan. Hence, if Barilaro was adhering to the Coalition principle of freedom from accountability and critique, the choice to sue Shanks and suppress his speech would have been an obvious one. Defamation lawsuits like this one have become a weapon of choice for Liberal and National parties.

 

Once again, despite their rhetorical admiration for free speech, Libs and Nats are quick to suppress it in trumped up defamation charges. To be clear, defamation law can be a good thing, despite it being massively leveraged in favour of complainants. But it should not insulate democratically elected parliamentarians from legitimate criticism. Politicians in representative democracies are supposed to be accountable to the public and to journalists. Instead, we see Christian Porter suing the ABC for its factual reporting about allegations he raped a woman in 1988. We see Paul Fletcher using the office of Communications Minister to demand the ABC “explain how an expose into alleged affairs and harassment of women in Parliament was in the public interest”. Peter Dutton is suing a refugee activist for calling him a “rape apologist” on Twitter. In the House of Representatives, under Leaders of the House, Porter, and now Dutton, the Coalition has moved that members of the opposition “be no longer heard” at record numbers. Whenever the opposition begins criticising the government at length, the Coalition shuts down parliamentary debate. What sensitive snowflakes these virtuous champions of free speech have shown themselves to be!

 

This year there were reports of inconsistent enforcement of speech restrictions on public servants. It was reported that a Parliamentary researcher, Geoff Wade, was given leeway to publish in weapons-manufacturer-funded think-tank, ASPI’s magazine. He was also allowed to espouse hawkish anti-China sentiment on social media at will, whereas others in the public service have been fired for far less. Incidentally, Wade has employed ASPI’s go-to firm, Meyer Vandenberg, to sue for defamation those (Marcus Rubenstein, John Menadue, and others) who exposed his apparent special protections. Human Rights lawyer, Greg Barns SC, said that “what Mr Wade’s case shows is that freedom of speech appears to be okay if the government employee is not criticising the federal government.” This is not only true of Wade’s case, but it’s true of the federal and NSW government’s attitudes in general. In Australia, and especially under Coalition rule, public-interest journalism is public enemy number one. For all of their chest-beating over freedom of speech, they are lightning quick to cut out the tongues of any Australians who dares speak truth to power.