Why a press freedom law should matter to us all | Peter Greste | TEDxUQ

Summary

The speaker, a former Al Jazeera correspondent, recounts his arrest in Cairo for allegedly supporting terrorism, highlighting the chilling effect on press freedom. Drawing parallels with recent Australian police raids on journalists, he warns of the dangers posed by broad national security laws that can silence critical reporting. Advocates for a Media Freedom Act in Australia to safeguard press freedom and ensure transparency and accountability in democracy.

Takeaways

• 📰 Press freedom is often taken for granted until it's threatened.
• 🌍 The speaker's personal experience in Cairo underscored the reality of press freedom violations.
• 🏢 Journalists covering the political crisis in Egypt faced government crackdowns.
• 🚨 Vaguely worded national security laws can be used to suppress journalism.
• 🔒 The speaker and colleagues were arrested and accused of serious charges, including aiding terrorists.
• 🔍 Authorities sought to uncover journalistic sources, undermining press freedom.
• 📡 Raids on Australian journalists highlighted similar threats to press freedom at home.
• 🇦🇺 Australia has passed numerous national security laws post-9/11, impacting civil liberties.
• 📈 The chilling effect of such laws has led to self-censorship among journalists.
• 🛡️ Advocated solutions include a Media Freedom Act and reforms to national security legislation to protect press freedom.

Q & A

What was the significance of December 28th, 2013 for the speaker?

The speaker's concept of press freedom became a concrete reality on December 28th, 2013. It was the night when he was in Cairo working for Al Jazeera, covering a political crisis, and his hotel room was raided by men who ransacked his belongings, leading to his arrest along with two colleagues.

What were the charges against the speaker and his colleagues?

The speaker and his colleagues were accused of aiding and abetting a terrorist organization, financing a terrorist organization, being members of a terrorist organization, broadcasting false news with intent to undermine national security, and advocating terrorist ideology.

What was the government's stance on press freedom according to the speaker?

The government claimed to be committed to defending press freedom, but their actions, including the arrest of the speaker and his colleagues, suggested otherwise.

What was the connection between the speaker's experience in Egypt and the Australian journalists' raids?

The speaker drew a connection between the political imperatives that led to the drafting of loosely worded national security legislation in Egypt, which was used to silence journalism, and similar actions by the Australian government that led to raids on journalists' offices and homes.

What was the nature of the stories that led to the raids on Australian journalists?

The raids were in response to stories that exposed potential government overreach and sensitive information: one story was about the government considering expanding the powers of Australia's electronic spy agency, and the other was about allegations of war crimes committed by Australian Special Forces in Afghanistan.

How many pieces of national security legislation have been passed in Australia since 9/11?

According to Professor George Williams from Sydney University, more than 70 pieces of national security legislation have passed through the Australian Parliament since 9/11.

What is the issue with Section 35P of the ASIO act as described by the speaker?

Section 35P allows the minister to declare any security operation a special intelligence operation (SIO), which is top secret. This broad definition can potentially criminalize legitimate journalistic investigations and makes it difficult to protect sources.

What is the impact of data retention legislation on journalists according to the speaker?

The data retention legislation gives over 20 government agencies free access to Australians' metadata without a warrant, which can potentially expose journalists' sources and deter them from pursuing stories.

What is the Telecommunications Amendment Act and how does it affect journalists?

The Telecommunications Amendment Act compels telecommunications workers to assist security services in hacking into encrypted communications. This poses a risk to journalists who rely on secure communications to protect their sources.

What is the 'Media Freedom Act' proposed by the speaker?

The 'Media Freedom Act' is a proposed legislation that aims to enshrine press freedom into Australia's Constitution, similar to the First Amendment in the United States, to protect press freedom and ensure transparency and accountability in democracy.

Why is the speaker advocating for changes to Australia's national security laws?

The speaker believes that current national security laws are too broad and can be misused to silence legitimate journalism. He suggests that these laws should be amended to include a public interest defense and to better protect whistleblowers, sources, and data.

Outlines

00:00

📰 Press Freedom Under Siege

The speaker begins by discussing the abstract nature of press freedom, which becomes a stark reality through a personal account of their experience as a journalist for al Jazeera in Cairo on December 28, 2013. They were covering a political crisis following a military coup that ousted the Muslim Brotherhood government. Despite the new government's introduction of broad national security legislation, they continued reporting, believing in the government's commitment to press freedom. However, they were violently arrested in their hotel room, along with two colleagues, and accused of serious charges including aiding terrorism and broadcasting false news. This experience highlighted the importance of press freedom and the chilling effect such actions have on journalism.

05:04

🔍 Journalism and Government Secrecy

The narrative continues with the speaker drawing parallels between their Egyptian experience and recent events in Australia, where journalists have been raided by the police for reporting on government overreach and alleged war crimes by Australian Special Forces in Afghanistan. The speaker criticizes the Australian government's enthusiastic passage of national security laws post-9/11, which have increasingly encroached upon civil liberties and press freedom. They argue that these laws have turned legitimate journalism into a criminal act, making it difficult to protect journalistic sources and chilling investigative journalism.

10:06

📖 The Chilling Effect of National Security Laws

The speaker delves into specific Australian legislation, such as the azo act and data retention laws, which have broad implications for privacy and press freedom. They explain how these laws can inadvertently criminalize journalists who unknowingly violate them while investigating stories in the public interest. The speaker also discusses the secretive nature of metadata requests for journalists and the potential for telecommunications workers to be forced to aid in hacking encrypted communications, which poses a threat to journalistic integrity. The chilling effect of these laws is leading to self-censorship, with editors shutting down stories to avoid legal repercussions.

15:08

🏛️ The Need for a Media Freedom Act

In the final paragraph, the speaker advocates for a Media Freedom Act in Australia to constitutionally protect press freedom, similar to the First Amendment in the United States. They argue that national security laws should not come at the expense of transparency and accountability, which are fundamental to democracy. The speaker suggests reforms to whistleblower, data protection, and suppression laws to better balance security needs with press freedom. They conclude by emphasizing that press freedom is not just about physical safety but also about preserving the democratic system that has made Australia prosperous and peaceful.

Keywords

💡Press Freedom

Press freedom refers to the right to report news without censorship, restraint, or control by the government. In the script, press freedom is a central theme, illustrating the importance of a free press in a democratic society. The speaker recounts personal experiences with press freedom violations, such as raids on journalists' offices, to emphasize its significance and the potential consequences of its erosion.

💡Al Jazeera

Al Jazeera is a Qatari state-funded broadcaster based in Doha, which provides news content in multiple languages. In the script, the speaker mentions working for Al Jazeera as a correspondent, which situates them within the context of international journalism and underscores the global nature of press freedom issues.

💡Cairo

Cairo is the capital of Egypt and is mentioned in the script as the location where the speaker was reporting on a political crisis. This reference to Cairo is crucial as it sets the scene for the speaker's personal encounter with press freedom violations, providing a real-world example of the challenges journalists face in certain regions.

💡National Security Legislation

National security legislation refers to laws enacted to protect a nation from various threats to its security. The script discusses how such legislation can be broadly and vaguely defined, leading to concerns about press freedom. The speaker points out that these laws can be used to suppress journalism under the guise of protecting national security.

💡Terrorism

Terrorism, as defined in the script, is a term that can be broadly interpreted under national security legislation, potentially encompassing any action that threatens state integrity. This broad definition is problematic for journalists, as it can be used to justify crackdowns on reporting that the government deems inconvenient.

💡Raid

A raid, in the context of the script, refers to the forced entry into the speaker's hotel room by individuals who ransacked their belongings. This event is a vivid example of an infringement on press freedom, illustrating the physical threat and intimidation journalists can face.

💡Metadata

Metadata is data that provides information about other data, such as who sent an email, to whom, and when. In the script, metadata is discussed in the context of data retention legislation, which allows government agencies to access this information without a warrant. The speaker argues that this can infringe on privacy and hinder journalistic investigations by exposing sources.

💡Whistleblower

A whistleblower is an individual who exposes unethical or illegal activities within an organization. The script mentions the need to reform whistleblower legislation to protect those who reveal important information to the public, such as journalists' sources, which is essential for transparency and accountability.

💡Espionage

Espionage involves spying or using stealth to obtain secret or confidential information. The script refers to the Espionage and Foreign Interference Act, which can be used to prosecute those revealing information that might undermine confidence in Australia. This highlights the tension between national security and the public's right to know.

💡Media Freedom Act

The Media Freedom Act is a proposed piece of legislation mentioned in the script that aims to protect press freedom by law. The speaker argues for such an act to be introduced in Australia to safeguard journalistic practices and sources, similar to the First Amendment in the United States, which protects freedom of the press.

💡Public Interest Defense

Public Interest Defense is a legal argument that justifies actions taken in the interest of the public good. The script suggests that the current public interest defense in Australia is problematic because it allows for raids on journalists. The speaker proposes reforms to ensure that the security services must demonstrate why such a defense would not apply.

Highlights

Press freedom is often taken for granted until it's threatened.

The author's experience in Cairo on December 28, 2013, made press freedom a tangible reality.

Journalists were reporting on the political crisis following a military coup in Egypt.

The interim government was introducing broad national security legislation.

The author and colleagues were arrested for allegedly aiding a terrorist organization.

Charges against journalists included broadcasting false news and advocating terrorist ideology.

Journalists' sources and contacts are crucial for democracy but were under threat.

The author draws a parallel between Australia and Egypt regarding press freedom threats.

Australian journalists have been raided for reporting on government overreach and alleged war crimes.

Australia has passed over 70 pieces of national security legislation since 9/11.

Loosely worded laws are used to silence journalism that challenges the government.

Section 35P of the ASIO act can criminalize legitimate journalism.

Data retention legislation gives government agencies warrantless access to metadata.

Journalists are advised to shut down stories without secure encrypted communications.

The Espionage and Foreign Interference Act can imprison journalists for revealing information.

A media freedom act is proposed to protect press freedom in Australia's Constitution.

National security laws should not come at the expense of transparency and accountability.

The media acts as a whistle of last resort for democracy.

Transcripts

for most of us press freedom is an

abstraction it's an idea that we're all

vaguely aware of but don't often really

stop to consider with any great depth

even for those of us who work in the

industry it can all feel a bit wooly a

bit vague a little bit like oxygen

something that we know that we need we

can't operate without but we only ever

really stop to think about when we're at

risk of losing it well for me vague idea

of press freedom on the night of

December 28th of 2013 became a very

concrete reality but then I was working

for al Jazeera I was a correspondent

I've been called to Cairo to cover the

Christmas New Year period and we were

reporting on the unfolding political

crisis the interim government had was

trying to establish and serve its

control over the country after the

previous government had been ousted in a

military coup six months earlier now

that government was the Muslim

Brotherhood and its supporters were

still in the streets advocating and

protesting and demanding the return of

the Brotherhood administration now as

journalists we were doing what any

responsible reporters should be we were

talking to all of the parties involved

in the dispute

now the government the interim

government was also introducing new

pieces of national security legislation

that no sorts of ways were were defined

very broadly very vaguely they were

defining things like terrorism as

anything that threatens the integrity of

the state they were also introducing new

laws that criminalized advocating

terrorist ideology now for us that was

concerning it raised a number of red

flags but we weren't too concerned

because we took the government at its

word when it said that it was committed

to defending press freedom now that

night December the 28th I was in my

hotel room I was getting ready to go out

for dinner with an old friend of mine

who hadn't seen for a few years and

there was a knock on the door it was a

little bit unusual normally when people

had messages for me they used the

telephone

I didn't think too much about it though

as I approached the door and then there

was a second more urgent more forceful

knock I didn't bother checking the

peephole I simply cracked open the

handle and as I did it was flung inside

as if there was a powerful spring behind

it and the room was flooded with a whole

load of men maybe eight or ten of them

and I was forced to the back of the room

and they went through and ransacked

everything that I had they grabbed my

notebooks my computer equipment my

cameras and so on and it was a deeply

confronting scary moment confusing I had

no idea what was going on the guys in

there were all in plain clothes but they

also moved with a professionalism a

discipline that suggested they were more

than just a bunch of thugs which to be

honest with you I took some comfort in

eventually they placed me under arrest

and dragged me down to the police cells

where I learned that my two colleagues

my Egyptian producer Baron Muhammad and

my Egyptian Canadian bureau chief

Mohamed Fahmy were also under arrest a

few days later during the interrogation

we learned what our charges were we'd

been accused of aiding and abetting a

terrorist organization and financing a

terrorist organization of being members

of a terrorist organization of

broadcasting false news with intent to

undermine national security and yes of

advocating terrorist ideology and when

you think about it those charges are

about as serious as you could possibly

get short of actually pulling the pin on

a grenade and rolling it into the middle

of a crowded room like this now very

serious charges

indeed and as the interrogation drew on

we also learned that the authorities

have been looking for our sources our

contacts now those are so important for

journalists so fundamental to the work

that we do in the role that we play in a

democracy that there are shield laws

that protect journalists from actually

having to reveal their sources in a

court of law a few days later a few

weeks rather later once the whole

interrogation phase was over

we wound up in court behind a steel cage

wearing blue prison uniforms and it was

at that moment that all of a sudden we

came to embody press freedom that

abstract idea I mentioned earlier people

could see and understand what it looks

like when press freedom is taken away so

you can understand why it was so

confronting for me when I saw those

images of the Australian Federal Police

raiding the offices and homes of

journalists from to news organizations

here in Australia a few months ago let

me tell you a little bit about what

happened back then annika Smethurst a

journalist for News Corp had two years

previously uncovered a story about the

way in which the government was

considering expanding the powers of the

Australian signals Directorate that's

Australia's electronic spy agency so

that they could monitor the

communications of ordinary Australians

inside Australia now Anika didn't

publish anything that actually

undermined the operational integrity of

the ASD instead what she was doing was

exposing a conversation a private

confidential conversation within

government a classified conversation and

involving a debate that we are that I

think should have been public that we

all should have been a part of and what

about the ABC

well it's journalists had uncovered

allegations that Australian Special

Forces were involved in war crimes in

Afghanistan and there - the journalists

weren't exposing anything that could

have threatened the operational

integrity of the Special Forces

there was nothing in there that damaged

national security what they were doing

was exposing something that I think we

all needed to know about because after

all the Special Forces are operating in

our name in our defence now I'm drawing

the connection with Egypt and Australia

not to suggest that Australia is about

to become Egypt any time soon but here's

the thing the political imperatives

which drove the Egyptians to draft

loosely worded national

security legislation that was then used

to silence inconvenient journalism are

the same political imperatives that have

driven the Australian government to

draft loosely worded national security

legislation that was then used to

silence uncomfortable journalism in fact

Australia has been so enthusiastic about

passing national security laws that

since 9/11 Professor George Williams

from Sydney University has countered

more than 70 pieces of national security

legislation that have passed through

Australian Parliament's many of which

intrude in some way on the civil

liberties of ordinary Australians now

what does this mean for press freedom

well in many cases what it's done is

criminalized what would otherwise what

would previously have been considered as

legitimate journalism and it made it

impossible for us to protect our sources

so let me give you a few examples

there's section 35 P of the azo act now

that section allows the minister to

declare any security operation what's

called an SiO a special intelligence

operation now that designation itself is

top secret so a journalist who is

perhaps investigating say a botched azo

raid local reports of a botched azo raid

in which somebody is perhaps killed or

wounded or harmed in some way runs the

risk of unwittingly violating the act

and finding themselves in prison for

five years the SiO designation was

designed for good purpose it was

designed to give a zio operatives the

opportunity to work undercover to do

illegal things in the course of their

investigations such as say a narcotics

agent carrying drugs to try and open up

a drugs ring but the way it's defined is

so broad that it gives the minister the

authority to place that SiO designation

over anything that they might want to

keep hidden and by the way the SiO

designation exists in perpetuity so even

investigating the history of azo runs

the risk of landing you in trouble

what about the data retention

legislation well that was sold to us as

essential to allow the security services

the capacity to monitor and intercept

terrorist communications so that they

could stop mass casualty attacks it's

really important the sort of thing that

we want the the legislation gives a

whole host of government agencies more

than 20 of them the access the free

access to look at any Australians

metadata without a warrant now the

metadata for those of you who don't know

is not the content of your

communications it isn't the emails that

you send or the conversations that you

have over the phone but it is the email

addresses that you sent that you

communicate with the telephone numbers

you call the text messages you send the

websites you visit the locations that

you are when you make those

communications and so on the information

is so rich that one former FBI director

said that if you have access to metadata

you don't really need to know the

contents of the communications to learn

what it is that people are up to and

what they're planning now last year we

know according to the Telecommunications

Alliance an industry group that they

received more than three hundred

thousand requests for metadata more than

a thousand a day now quite apart from

what that means for our own privacy and

civil liberties what about journalists

well that is the one exception the

authorities still require warrants to

investigate journalists metadata but

those hearings are in secret and

journalists are never consulted about

why it might be important that their

stories are protected that their sources

are able to remain anonymous it's now so

serious that news editors are typically

telling their journalists that if you do

not have secure encrypted communications

then you've got to shut the story down

except there's also the

telecommunications Amendment Act those

piece of legislation forces any

telecommunications worker to help the

security services hack into encrypted

communications

a journalist simply looking into

Australia's foreign affairs our foreign

relations among things as mundane as

Trade and Investment runs the risk of

going foul of the espionage and foreign

interference act under that law any

serving of former Commonwealth officer

who reveals any information that might

be undermining the confidence in

Australia runs the risk of being

imprisoned for seven years up to ten

years if they carry a security

classification witness K the ASIS agent

who revealed that Australian government

was bugging the rooms of an st marys

delegation during sensitive oil

negotiations well he's just pleaded

guilty to espionage charges the point is

that you don't really need to be putting

journalists in prison for these laws to

have an effect our research is showing

that a lot of what would have previously

Beacons been considered as legitimate

journalistic inquiry is now being shut

down because editors are simply too

afraid either of going through the

trauma of having to go into court or

because they know they cannot afford the

costs of defending themselves in prison

in court this is a very big deal for us

but there is a solution here that's

being Ted one of the solutions that we

have is what we call a media freedom act

Australia doesn't have any

constitutional protection for press

freedom or for freedom of speech for

that matter nothing at all what we do

have is a ruling from the High Court

from 1992 in a landmark case in which

they said that Australia has a

constitutionally mandated system of

representative democracy and because we

have that system of representative

democracy doesn't work unless you're

able to communicate freely about

political issues and so there is an

implied right of political communication

that's why I think we need a media

freedom act to hardwire

the idea of press freedom into the very

DNA of our Constitution to do what the

first amendment does in the United

States it effectively restrains

legislators from either directly or

indirectly passing laws that limit press

freedom unnecessarily and also acts as a

benchmark as a ruler that the judiciary

can use whenever there are duty

adjudicating on cases that involve press

freedom we also think that we need to be

amending Australia's national security

laws now at the moment for example there

is a public interest defense the

journalists can use whenever they're

whenever they're in court to justify why

they're doing the stories that they are

and why their sources should remain

protected I think that's a problem

because it allows the kinds of raids

that we saw the other week I think that

there is a way of making a public

interest exception in other words we

should be forcing the security services

to apply for warrants showing in the

process that the public interest defense

would not apply we can be reforming

whistleblower legislation which is

inconsistent across the states our

source protection laws data protection

laws we can be we can be reforming our

suppression water system overall what we

need to be doing is trying to enshrine

in law the fundamental system of

transparency and accountability which is

made our democracy work now this is key

I am NOT suggesting that we need to be

undoing our national security laws

absolutely not

I completely understand the need to

update our laws to make sure that our

agencies have the capacity to adapt to

evolving threats but this is as I said

about protecting transparency in our

system of democracy the media is the

whistle of last resort at the moment

what's happening is it's portrayed as a

trade-off as a balancing act as if on

the one hand you can have nap more and

you have national security or you can

have press freedom the more you have of

one the less you have of the

but I think that's a mistake you see if

national security is about anything at

all

surely it is about protecting yes the

physical security of ordinary

Australians and our infrastructure and

our property and so on but it must also

be about protecting the very system of

accountability and transparency that has

made our democracy one of the most

safest peaceful and prosperous places on

the planet thank you