Cyber Security

Luke Hally

Annika Smethurst scapegoated by government

September 27, 2021
Categories:
Tags: ,

On 29 April 2018, NewCorp journalist, Annika Smethurst, reported that the federal government was wanting to expand its powers to spy on Australian citizens. This involved the broadening of the ASD’s jurisdiction to include domestic surveillance – at the time they were restricted to international operations. Smethurst had gained access to top secret letters between the secretaries of the Department of Home Affairs and Defence which discussed the idea.

That day, on the 29th April 2018, the Department of Defence referred the ‘leak’ to the Federal Police. At the same time Tanya Plibersek of the Labor opposition asked “Who is it in government that is leaking highly classified information — perhaps to try and stop Peter Dutton’s latest power grab?”. Others in the opposition also expressed concern over the leak and the government’s competency to keep the nation secure. On the same day the departments in question denied the plan, issuing a joint statement saying:

In relation to today’s media claim, there is no proposal to increase the ASD’s powers to collect intelligence on Australians or to covertly access their private data. … The cyber security function entails protecting Australians from cyber-enabled crime and cyber-attacks, and not collecting intelligence on Australians. These are two distinct functions, technically and operationally.

https://news.defence.gov.au/media/on-the-record/joint-statement-response-media-reports-regarding-asds-powers

Over a year later on 4th June 2019, Smethurst’s home was raided by federal police seizing documents, computers and a mobile phone, according to the ABC in order to track down the source. Numerous journalists expressed concern, with NewsCorp stating “This will chill public-interest reporting”. Scott Morrison and Christian Porter defended the raid, claim that the AFP were following the law, with Morrison saying:

it never troubles me that our laws are being upheld

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-05/scott-morrison-defends-raid-on-journalist-annika-smethurst-home/11180186

However in April 2020 the High Court ruled that the search warrant was invalid and on 27 May 2020 the Federal Police announced they would not be pressing charges against Smethurst.

The invalidity of the search warrant rendered the AFP’s entry into and search of Ms Smethurst’s residence unlawful and an act of trespass.

https://www.hrlc.org.au/human-rights-case-summaries/2020/8/25/the-high-court-of-australia-quashes-search-warrant-on-journalists-home

While this two year debacle was underway, on 20 Feb 2020, Home Affairs Minister, Peter Dutton said it’s time for a “public debate” over domestic surveillance powers. Thus confirming the original article by Smethurst and invalidating counter claims by the departments.

Scapegoat

Annika Smethurst and, I think journalists and the press in general, were scapegoated here. She had discovered, or was informed of a plan by the government to encroach on our privacy and freedom and the government responded with a government sized temper tantrum. Given the overturning of the search warrant, the conclusion I draw is that the raids and comments by the Prime Minister served two purposes:

  • Distract the public, reassure them everything is ok, while knowing most people won’t connect the stories when the truth comes out 
  • Discredit Smethurst as in cahoots with paedophiles and the ‘bad guy’ (whistleblower) who had leaked classified information
  • Intimidate Smethurst and all journalists not to cover public interest stories

Reflection

I didn’t pay a lot of attention to this at the time. I probably heard talk of preventing paedophiles and thought “yeah I want to stop those creeps”. But … Since I started this degree I’ve looked into government surveillance and overreach. This paedophile excuse is the same one Pyne used to get Shorten to roll over on TOLA. I still want to stop them, but I’m not sure I believe the government’s excuse. And the Smethurst case demonstrates a pattern of behaviour in the government to want more and more ability to surveil us and take away our privacy and freedom. We’ve seen evidence of this not just here but in these Bills and Acts:

I wonder if we will ever see the government reverse these acts and return our privacy? Or will it be on us to hide from them? I think the latter.

References 

In approx. chronological order.

Recent posts

© Copyright 2021, Luke Hally