Australia approves bill to make foreign influence on politics more transparent

Australia passed two bills that would criminalize any covert, foreign activity intended to influence domestic politics. While the  government says the legislation is not aimed at any specific country, there are reports that the bills were created in response to Chinese interference in Australian policy. 

Mick Tsikas/Reuters
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull at an Australia China Business Council at Parliament House in Canberra, Australia, June 19, 2018. Australia's House of Representatives passed legislation on Tuesday that would ban covert foreign interference in domestic politics. Australian media reports say that the bills were created due to Chinese interference in Australian policy.

Australia's House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved national security legislation on Tuesday that would ban covert foreign interference in domestic politics and make industrial espionage for a foreign power a crime.

The two bills covering foreign interference, espionage and influence transparency have been criticized as criminalizing dissent. But the Senate is expected to make them law by Thursday with the support of the center-left Labor Party opposition.

Individuals lobbying for foreign governments would have to be listed on a public register in a step toward making foreign influence on Australian politics more transparent.

The conservative government says the legislation, first proposed in December, is the major cause of a rift in diplomatic relations with China, Australia's most important trading partner. But the government maintains that it is not aimed at any particular country.

Attorney General Christian Porter told Parliament on Tuesday the bills include the most significant counter-spying reforms in Australia since the 1970s.

"The practices of modern espionage are now being encountered in so many Western democracies around the globe," Mr. Porter said.

The bills include 38 new crimes plus existing crimes with broader definitions. The new crimes include stealing trade secrets on behalf of foreign government, which would become punishable by 15 years in prison.

"Until this point, astonishingly and dangerously, no criminal offense in Australia existed to criminalize economic espionage of the type defined in this bill," Porter said.

A person who engages in covert or deceptive activity to influence political or governmental process, such as organizing a rally, without revealing he or she was operating on behalf of a foreign government could be guilty of a range of foreign interference crimes with maximum penalties ranging from 10 to 20 years in prison.

Both bills have been substantially amended in recent weeks on the advice of a parliamentary committee that scrutinized them, narrowing their focus and reach and increasing the number of organizations that are exempt.

Charities that accept foreign funding but not foreign government direction are exempt, the Catholic Church will not have to register as an agent of the Vatican, and the media have legal protections in reporting leaked national security information.

Speaking in support of the legislation, senior opposition lawyer Mark Dreyfus said there was no evidence that Australia had experienced the type of foreign interference evident in the latest presidential elections in the United States and France and in the United Kingdom's Brexit referendum.

"It's apparent that in other parts of the world, covert actors are seeking on an unprecedented scale to interfere with and manipulate the political processes of democratic countries, particularly by attacking free and fair elections," Mr. Dreyfus told Parliament. "Australia will not allow this conduct to arrive on our shores."

But independent lawmaker Andrew Wilkie, who quit his job as a defense intelligence analyst in 2003 in protest against the then-government's use of non-existent weapons of mass destruction to explain sending Australian troops to back the United States-led invasion of Iraq, voted against the bills. Mr. Wilkie argued their definitions of national security and foreign interference were too broad.

Environmentalists protesting against the enormous Adani coal mine proposed for Australia's north could be prosecuted for a crime of sabotage under the legislation if that protest was defined as a threat to the nation's economic security, Wilkie said.

Adam Brandt, a minor Greens party lawmaker who described the legislation as criminalizing dissent, was the only lawmaker other than Wilkie to vote against the bills in the House.

London-based Amnesty International said in a statement the legislation would make holding the Australian government to account on human rights obligations a crime.

Australian media have reported that the bills were the result of a classified government report commissioned by Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull in 2016 that found that the Chinese Communist Party had tried to influence Australian policy, compromise political parties and gain access to all levels of government for a decade. The government won't comment on the media reports.

China protested Turnbull's announcement of the foreign interference ban.

The Chinese foreign ministry said in December that Turnbull's remarks were prejudiced against China and had poisoned the atmosphere of China-Australia relations.

A related bill announced in December to ban foreign political donations, of which China is the largest source, is still being drafted. Labor has voluntarily refused to accept foreign donations.

This story was reported by The Associated Press. 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.