The national security watchdog is calling for an overhaul of espionage and foreign interference laws to provide more clarity for the business community and to prevent companies from unwittingly falling foul of the rules while conducting legitimate activities.
It also urges the introduction of a new offence targeting “coerced repatriation” where members of diaspora communities are pressured into leaving Australia because of threats and intimidation by a foreign – normally authoritarian – power.
A major review of Australia’s espionage, foreign interference, sabotage and theft of trade secrets offences, conducted by independent national security legislation monitor Jake Blight, offers 20 recommendations to make the laws more effective and proportionate.
A spokesperson for Attorney-General Michelle Rowland said the government would carefully consider the report’s conclusions.
“Foreign interference, espionage and related conduct threaten the things we value most about our country – our social cohesion, our trust in democracy and our freedom of thought and expression,” he said.
The report warned that some offences were overly broad and unnecessarily complex and risked inadvertently sweeping up standard business operations, international joint ventures and confidential corporate negotiations.
It also urged the government to issue clearer definitions of national security to avoid infringing on freedom of speech and protest rights and undermining public interest journalism and academic work.
This included clarifying the “covert” element of foreign interference offences to “put beyond doubt that the expression does not capture forms of confidentiality or even secrecy that are routine in business, journalism and diplomacy”.
In one of its most significant conclusions, the review urges a new offence of coerced repatriation to counter the rise of transnational repression, which refers to attempts by foreign regimes to threaten diaspora communities with aggression, harassment and assassination.
Blight outlines the use of “insidious” tactics including trying to strong-arm people to report on members of their community and threatening perceived dissidents and their families with violence if they do not leave Australia.
The nation’s top spy chief Mike Burgess has previously warned there is a “realistic possibility” a foreign government will try to assassinate a dissident on Australian soil, and the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation believes at least three nations are willing and able to do so.
ASIO and the INSLM review do not single out individual countries in their warnings.
But on Friday, opposition foreign affairs spokesman Ted O’Brien raised concerns that China’s new Law on Promoting Ethnic Unity and Progress Promotion, designed to create a “shared” national identity among the country’s 55 ethnic minority groups, could be used to target the Chinese diaspora in Australia.
The law, which came into force earlier this month, contains a clause that says people outside of China can be held legally accountable for undermining “ethnic unity and progress or inciting ethnic separatism”.
“What does this mean for Australians whose families trace their heritage to Hong Kong, Taiwan, Tibet, Xinjiang and Mongolia?” O’Brien asked in a speech to the St Leo’s Alumni Association on Friday.
“And what does it mean for Chinese-Australians who embrace our way of life and subscribe to our democratic values?”
O’Brien said Australia should declare a “red line” on any attempt by China to expand the notion of sovereignty beyond territoriality and nationality to include claims based on ethnicity or ancestry.
He said he would launch a series of short videos, speaking in Mandarin, to reassure Chinese-Australians that fellow Australians were “on their side”.
“I repeat my call for the Australian government to urgently determine the implications of the new Ethnic Unity law for members of the Chinese diaspora who might be included in the definition of President Xi Jinping’s ‘Chinese Nation’,” he said.
“And I urge the Albanese Labor government to provide assurances that concerned members of the Chinese diaspora will be protected.”
A spokesperson for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade said the government had raised concerns about the law’s potential to curtail the rights and freedoms of individuals beyond China’s borders directly with China and at the UN Human Rights Council.
“All people in Australia, regardless of citizenship, are protected by Australian law and enjoy Australian political freedoms,” said the spokesperson.
“We will not accept other governments interfering with the rights and freedoms of any Australian citizens or individuals in Australia.”
The Chinese embassy was contacted for comment.
