Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T16:24:26.258Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Weight of a Word: ‘Covert’ and the Proportionality of Australia’s Foreign Interference Laws

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Tony Ross Open the ORCID record for Tony Ross [Opens in a new window]
Tony Ross*
Affiliation:
JD (ANU)
*
The author may be contacted at tony.ross@alumni.anu.edu.au.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Act 2018 (Cth) introduced the first offences for acts of foreign interference in Australian history. Inter alia, the laws target activities sponsored by a foreign principal which seek to influence Australia’s democratic processes using coercive, deceptive and covert conduct. The Act’s offences address coercive and deceptive conduct by foreign actors, which align with those behaviours which find contempt in international law. However, it is the Act’s targeting of ‘covert’ conduct which has drawn the widest criticism, and which was the subject of a High Court challenge in Zhang v Commissioner of Police [2021] HCA 16. Despite the High Court not being required to determine the validity of the foreign interference offences, there remain serious questions regarding the proportionality of the offences within the legislation which target covert behaviour which is not coercive or deceptive. Such benign covert behaviour is not condemned in international law, and its prohibition in Australia presents as an attempt by the government to remediate exploitable gaps in international law by controlling the interactions of its own citizenry with foreign actors. When the available alternatives to such measures are considered, this regulation appears excessive. Thus, a future challenge to Australia’s foreign interference laws may focus on the burden which the foreign interference offence’s ‘covert’ element places on the constitutionally entrenched implied freedom of political communication.

Type
Articles
Information
Federal Law Review , Volume 50 , Issue 4 , December 2022 , pp. 581 - 610
Copyright
Copyright © 2022 The Author(s)

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

I am thankful to Associate Professor Moeen Cheema for his supervision, and to Associate Professor Amelia Simpson for her invaluable feedback. I also thank the journal’s referees for their feedback which guided me so effectively. All views are my own.

References

1. Commonwealth, Parliamentary Debates, House of Representatives, 7 December 2017, 13148 (Malcolm Turnbull) (‘EFI Second Reading Speech’) (emphasis added).

2. Ibid 13145.

3. See, eg, Amy Greenbank, ‘Spies in our Suburbs’, ABC News (online), 25 August 2019 <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-25/spies-in-our-suburbs-alleged-spy-web-silencing-rwandan-refugees/11317704?nw=0> (‘Spies in Our Suburbs’).

4. Mike Head, ‘Australian Parliamentary Staffer Initiates Legal Challenge To “Foreign Interference” Laws’, World Socialist Website (online), 14 May 2021 <https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/08/10/laws-a10.html>.

5. Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) ss 92.3(1)–(2) (‘Criminal Code’).

6. 95 ALJR 432 (‘Zhang’).

7. Ibid 439 [28].

8. Refers to the construction of ‘covert’, as found in Criminal Code (n 5) ss 92.2(1)(d)(i), 92.3(1)(d)(i).

9. (2021) 391 ALR 188 (‘LibertyWorks’).

10. Vasu Mohan and Alan Wall, ‘Foreign Electoral Interference: Past, Present and Future’ (2019) 20 (Fall) Georgetown Journal of International Affairs 110, 116.

11. Mark Mazzetti and Eric Lichtblau, ‘C.I.A Judgement Built on Swell of Evidence’, The New York Times (online), 11 December 2016 <https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/11/us/politics/cia-judgment-intelligence-russia-hacking-evidence.html?searchResultPosition=3>.

12. Katherine Mansted, ‘The Domestic Security Grey Zone: Navigating the Space Between Foreign Influence and Foreign Interference’ (Occasional Paper, National Security College, The Australian National University, February 2021) 10.

13. Paul Behrens, Diplomatic Interference and the Law (Hart Publishing, 2016) 5–8.

14. Henning Lahmann, ‘Information Operations and the Question of Illegitimate Interference Under International Law’ (2020) 53(2) Israel Law Review 189, 189.

15. Dov H Levin, ‘When the Great Power Gets a Vote: The Effects of Great Power Electoral Interventions on Election Results’ (2016) 60(2) International Studies Quarterly 189, 189.

16. Lahmann (n 14) 217.

17. Ibid 210–12.

18. Ibid.

19. Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade v Magno (1992) 112 ALR 529, 534–5 (Gummow J).

20. Lahmann (n 14) 208.

21. Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, signed 18 April 1961, 500 UNTS 95 (entered into force 24 April 1964) art 41.

22. Maziar Jamnejad and Michael Wood, ‘The Principle of Non-Intervention’ (2009) 22(2) Leiden Journal of International Law 345, 350, cited in Lahmann (n 14) 195.

23. See, eg, Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention and Interference in the Internal Affairs of State, GA Res 36/103, UN Doc A/Res/36/103 (9 December 1981).

24. Robert Jennings and Arthur Watts, Oppenheim’s International Law (Longman, 9th ed, 1992) vol 1, 429, cited in Russel Buchan, ‘Cyber Attacks: Unlawful Uses of Force or Prohibited Interventions?’ (2012) 17(2) Journal of Conflict & Security Law 212, 221.

25. (Nicaragua v United States of America) (Merits) [1986] ICJ Rep 14 (‘Nicaragua’).

26. Ibid 107–8 [205].

27. Lahmann (n 14) 196.

28. Nicaragua (n 25) 107–8 [205].

29. Lahmann (n 14) 216.

30. Levin (n 15) 190.

31. Mohan and Wall (n 10) 111.

32. Sabrina Tavernise, Mark Landler and Helene Cooper, ‘With New Afghan Vote, Path to Stability Is Unclear’, The New York Times (online), 20 October 2009, cited in Lahmann (n 14) 194.

33. Charles E Ziegler, ‘International Dimensions of Electoral Processes: Russia, the USA, and the 2016 Elections’ [2018] (55) International Politics 557, 557.

34. See, eg, Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 USC § 1030 (1986).

35. See generally Matthew C Waxman, ‘Cyber Attacks as “Force” Under UN Charter Article 2(4)’ [2011] (87) International Law Studies 43, 45.

36. Russel Buchan, ‘Cyber Attacks: Unlawful Uses of Force or Prohibited Interventions?’ (2012) 17(2) Journal of Conflict & Security Law 211, 212.

37. Jason Barkham, ‘Information Warfare and International Law on the Use of Force’ (2001) 34(1) New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 57, 84.

38. Australian Security and Intelligence Organisation, ASIO Report to Parliament 2013–14 (Annual Report, 2014) ix.

39. See, eg, Michael N Schmitt, ‘“Virtual” Disenfranchisement: Cyber Election Meddling in the Grey Zones of International Law’ (2018) 19(1) Chicago Journal of International Law 30.

40. See, eg, Jens D Ohlin, ‘Did Russian Cyber-Interference in the 2016 Election Violate International Law?’ (2017) 95(7) Texas Law Review 1579.

41. Island of Palmas Case (Netherlands v US) (Awards) (1928) 2 RIAA 829, 838 (emphasis added).

42. Schmitt (n 39) 45.

43. Ibid 46–7.

44. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, opened for signature 16 December 1966, 999 UNTS 171 (entered into force 23 March 1976) art 1 (‘ICCPR’).

45. Jens D Ohlin, ‘Election Interference: The Real Harm and the Only Solution’ (Research Paper No. 18–50, Cornell Law School, 2018), 11.

46. Ibid 12–13.

47. Lahmann (n 14) 216.

48. Ibid 217.

49. Kenneth B Nunn, ‘The Legality of Covert Action Under Contemporary International Law’ (1984) 1 La Raza Law Journal 139, 141. See generally Lahmann (n 14).

50. Michael Poznansky, ‘Feigning Compliance: Covert Action and International Law’ (2019) 63(1) International Studies Quarterly 72, 72–3.

51. Alexandra Perina, ‘Black Holes and Open Secrets: The Impact of Covert Action on International Law’ (2015) 53(3) Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 507, 517, 527–8.

52. Ibid.

53. Ibid 521–2.

54. Ibid.

55. See Schmitt (n 39) 46–7 for examples of how concealing the sponsor, not the act, may be contrary to law.

56. Ibid 216–17.

57. Perina (n 51) 514.

58. Rebecca Ananian-Welsh and George Williams, ‘The New Terrorists: The Normalisation and Spread of Anti-Terror Laws in Australia’ (2014) 38(2) Melbourne University Law Review 362, 365.

59. Carol Steiker, ‘The Limits of the Preventive State’ (1998) 88(3) Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 771, 776–80.

60. Lucia Zedner, ‘Fixing the Future? The Pre-emptive Turn in Criminal Justice’ in Bernadette McSherry, Alan Norrie and Simon Bronitt (eds), Regulating Deviance: The Redirection of Criminalisation and the Futures of Criminal Law (Hart, 2008) 46 (‘Fixing the Future’).

61. Ulrich Beck, ‘Living in the World Risk Society’ (2006) 35(3) Economy and Society 329, 334, cited in Tamara Tulich, ‘A View Inside the Preventative State: Reflections on a Decade of Anti-Terror Law’ (2012) 21(1) Griffith Law Review 209, 233.

62. Zedner (n 60) 220, citing Beck (n 61) 334.

63. Ibid. See also Brian Massumi, ‘Potential Politics and the Primacy of Pre-emption’ (2007) 10(2) Theory and Event 1, 2.

64. Lucia Zedner, ‘Preventative Justice or Pre-Punishment? The Case of Control Orders’ (2007) 60(1) Current Legal Problems 174, 192, cited in Tamara Tulich, ‘A View Inside the Preventative State: Reflections on a Decade of Anti-Terror Law’ (2012) 21(1) Griffith Law Review 209, 217.

65. Ibid.

66. Criminal Code (n 5) s 101.6.

67. Zedner (n 60) 46.

68. Ibid 238.

69. Tulich (n 61) 224.

70. Ibid 237–9.

71. Criminal Code (n 5) s 92.4(1).

72. Ananian-Welsh and Williams (n 58) 398. See also LibertyWorks (n 9) 94 [242]–[244] (Edelman J). See generally Thomas v Mowbray (2007) 237 ALR 194; Minister for Home Affairs v Benbrika (2021) 95 ALJR 166.

73. ASIO Annual Report 2014–2–15 (n 38) ix.

74. Australian Security and Intelligence Organisation, ASIO Annual Report to Parliament 2016–17 (Annual Report, 2017) 4–5.

75. See Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, Parliament of Australia, Advisory Report on the National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2017 (Report, June 2018) xvii–xxix (‘PJCIS Report’).

76. Revised Explanatory Memorandum, National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2017 (Cth) 2 (‘EFI REM’).

77. National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2018 (Cth).

78. EFI Second Reading Speech (n 1) 13145 (Malcolm Turnbull).

79. Ibid 13146.

80. Ibid.

81. Ibid 13148.

82. See, eg, Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Funding and Disclosure Reform) Act 2018 (Cth); Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2017 (Cth); Security of Critical Infrastructure Act 2018 (Cth).

83. EFI Second Reading Speech (n 1) 13148.

84. Ibid 13146–7.

85. Ibid.

86. Ibid 13148–9.

87. For an analysis on the EFI Act’s espionage provisions, see Sarah Kendall, ‘Australia’s New Espionage Laws: Another Case of Hyper-Legislation and Over-Criminalisation’ (2019) 38(1) University of Queensland Law Journal 125.

88. Criminal Code (n 5) div 92 sub-div C.

89. Ibid s 92.2(1).

90. Ibid s 92.3(1).

91. Ibid s 92.2(2).

92. Ibid s 92.3(2).

93. Ibid s 92.4(1).

94. PJCIS Report (n 75) ch 7.

95. Criminal Code (n 5) s 90.2.

96. Ibid s 90.3.

97. Ibid s 70.1.

98. Attorney-General’s Department, Submission No 6.1 to PJCIS, Parliament of Australia, Review of the National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2017 (13 February 2018) 50 (‘AGD Submission No 6.1 to PJCIS’).

99. Ibid.

100. See, eg, Law Council of Australia, Submission No 5.1 to PJCIS, Parliament of Australia, Review of the National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2017 (13 March 2018) 3.

101. Australian Lawyers Alliance, Submission No 12 to PJCIS, Parliament of Australia, Review of the National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2017 (22 January 2018) 8–9.

102. PJCIS Report (n 75) 51 [3.88].

103. AGD Submission No 6.1 to PJCIS (n 98) 50.

104. Criminal Code (n 5) ss 92.2(1)(a), 92.3(1)(a).

105. Ibid ss 92.2(1)(b)(i)–(ii), 92.2(1)(b)(i)–(ii).

106. Ibid s 92.2(1)(c).

107. Ibid s 92.3(1)(c).

108. Ibid ss 92.2(1)(c)(i), 92.3(1)(c)(i).

109. Ibid ss 92.2(1)(c)(ii), 92.3(1)(c)(ii).

110. Ibid ss 92.2(1)(c)(iii), 92.3(1)(c)(iii).

111. Ibid ss 92.2(1)(c)(iv), 92.3(1)(c)(iv).

112. Ibid ss 92.2(1)(d), 92.3(1)(d).

113. Ibid ss 92.2(1)(d)(i), 92.3(1)(d)(i).

114. Ibid ss 92.2(1)(d)(ii), 92.3(1)(d)(ii).

115. Ibid ss 92.2(1)(d)(iii), 92.3(1)(d)(iii).

116. EFI REM (n 76) 191.

117. Ibid.

118. Ibid.

119. Criminal Code (n 5) ss 92.2(2)(a), 92.3(2)(a).

120. Ibid ss 92.2(2)(b)(i)–(ii), 92.3(2)(b)(i)–(ii).

121. Ibid s 92.2(2)(c).

122. Ibid s 92.3(2)(c).

123. Ibid ss 92.2(2)(c)(i), 92.3(2)(c)(i).

124. Ibid ss 92.2(2)(c)(ii), 92.3(2)(c)(ii).

125. Ibid ss 92.2(2)(d), 92.3(2)(d).

126. EFI REM (n 76) 197 [888].

127. Criminal Code (n 5) s 92.4.

128. EFI REM (n 76) 211 [964].

129. Ibid 211 [964].

130. Ibid 210.

131. Ibid.

132. See EFI REM (n 76) 6–40 (‘Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights’). See generally Ben Golder and George Williams, ‘Balancing National Security and Human Rights: Assessing the Legal Response of Common Law Nations to the Threat of Terrorism’ (2006) 8(1) Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 43.

133. ‘National security’ is mentioned 556 times in the EFI REM (n 76).

134. Ananian-Welsh and Williams (n 58) 365.

135. See, eg, Hannah Ryan, ‘The Constitutional Cost of Combatting Espionage and Foreign Interference’ (2018) 47(1) Law Society Journal 73, 75.

136. Mansted (n 12) 13.

137. Lahmann (n 14) 214–16.

138. EFI Second Reading Speech (n 1) 13146.

139. Ibid 13149.

140. Ibid 13148.

141. Criminal Code (n 5) s 101.1.

142. See, eg, Criminal Code (n 5) s 92.2. See generally Bernadette McSherry, ‘Terrorism Offences in the Criminal Code: Broadening the Boundaries of Australian Criminal Laws’ (2004) 27(2) UNSW Law Journal 354, 364.

143. Criminal Code (n 5) s 4.1.

144. Ibid s 92.2 (1)(d)(ii).

145. Ibid s 92.2 (1)(d)(iii).

146. Ibid s 146.1.

147. Ibid s 138.2.

148. Ibid s 138.2(1).

149. EFI REM (n 76) 206 [932].

150. Ibid 196 [878].

151. Ibid [878].

152. Ibid [882].

153. Ibid 195 [874].

154. Ibid.

155. Criminal Code (n 5) s 92.1.

156. EFI REM (n 76) 195 [874].

157. Ibid 195 [872].

158. PJCIS Report (n 75) 20 [2.40].

159. Oxford Online Dictionary (online at 03 April 2022) ‘covert’ (def 2).

160. Zhang (n 6) 7 [19].

161. Ibid.

162. EFI REM (n 76) 195 [872].

163. Eric Lichtblau, ‘On Encryption Battle, Apple Has Advocates in Ex-National Security Officials’, The New York Times (online), 22 April 2016 <https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/23/business/on-encryption-battle-apple-has-advocates-in-ex-national-security-officials.html>.

164. Mike Head, ‘Australia’s New “Foreign Interference” Laws: A Threat to Anti-War Dissent’, World Socialist Web site (online), 12 July 2018 <https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/07/12/inte-j12.html>.

165. Daniel Mack, ‘An Era of Foreign Political Interference: Impulsive, Overcompensation of Australia, and a Comparison of Legislative Schemes with the United States’ (2020) 34(1) Emory International Law Review 367, 379.

166. Zhang (n 6) 5–6 [15].

167. Lonergan Research, ‘Australian Community Attitudes to Privacy Survey 2020’ (Report, Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, September 2020) 17.

168. Michael McGowan, ‘ASIO Says Threat to Australia Greater Now than in Cold War’, The Guardian (online), 31 January 2018 <https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/jan/31/asio-says-threat-to-australia-greater-now-than-in-cold-war> cited in Michael Head, ‘Australia’s Anti-Democratic ‘Foreign Interference’ Bills’ (2018) 43(3) Alternative Law Journal 160, 165.

169. ICCPR (n 44) art 19(2).

170. Dietrich v The Queen (1992) 177 CLR 292, 305 (Mason CJ and McHugh J).

171. Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011 (Cth), ss 8–9.

172. George Williams and Daniel Reynolds, ‘The Operation and Impact of Australia’s Parliamentary Scrutiny Regime for Human Rights’ (2015) 41(2) Monash University Law Review 469, 477.

173. ICCPR (n 44) art 19(3).

174. See, eg, Nyman Gibson Miralis, Submission No 35 to PJCIS, Parliament of Australia, Review of the National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2017 (undated) 5 (‘Nyman Gibson Miralis Submission No 35 to PJCIS’).

175. Ibid.

176. Australian Bureau of Statistics, Statistics on Australia’s International Migration, Internal Migration (Interstate and Intrastate), and the Population by Country of Birth (Catalogue 3412.0, 28 April 2020).

177. Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, Parliament of Australia, Human Rights Scrutiny (Report No 2, 13 February 2018) 24 (‘PJCHR Report’).

178. Ibid 24.

179. Ibid.

180. Mansted (n 12) 8.

181. See, eg, Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme Act 2018 (Cth) s 38 (‘FITS Act’).

182. Mansted (n 12) 8.

183. LibertyWorks (n 9) 28 [85] (Kiefel CJ, Keane and Gleeson JJ).

184. Ibid 16.

185. Mansted (n 12) 8, citing Michael Jensen, Titus C Chen and Tom Sear, ‘How Digital Media Blur the Border between Australia and China’, The Conversation (online), 16 November 2018 <http://theconversation.com/how-digital-media-blur-the-border-between-australia-and-china-101735>.

186. See generally Australian Strategic Policy Institute (‘ASPI’) – International Cyber Policy Centre, The Influence Environment: A Survey of Chinese-language Media in Australia (Policy Brief, Report No 42/2020, December 2020) (‘The Influence Environment’).

187. Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Reference Committee, Parliament of Australia, Canberra, 15 October 2020, 5 (Senator Tim Ayres).

188. See Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997) 189 CLR 520 (‘Lange’).

189. (2015) 257 CLR 178 (‘McCloy’).

190. Australian Capital Television v Commonwealth (1992) 177 CLR 106 (‘ACTV’).

191. McCloy (n 189) 193–5 [2]–[3].

192. Ryan (n 135) 75.

193. ASIO, ASIO Annual Report 2019–20 (2019) 4.

194. EFI Second Reading Speech (n 1) 13145.

195. Perina (n 51) 514.

196. Ian Barker, ‘Human Rights in an Age of Counter Terrorism’ (2005) 26(3) Australian Bar Review 267, 273.

197. Mansted (n 12) 17.

198. Ibid 18, citing Dirk van der Kley, ‘What should Australia do about the Influence of United Front Work’, China Matters Explores (online), September 2020 <http://chinamatters.org.au/wpcontent/uploads/2020/09/China-Matters-Explores-Sept-2020-United-Front.pdf> (‘The Influence of UF Work’).

199. Department of Home Affairs, ‘Countering Foreign Interference: National Counter Foreign Interference Coordinator’, Department of Home Affairs (Web Page, 27 January 2022) <https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about-us/our-portfolios/national-security/countering-foreign-interference/cfi-coordinator>.

200. Zedner (n 60) 46.

201. Dirk van der Kley, ‘Australian Chinese Trapped Between Beijing Bullies and Canberra Spooks’, Financial Review (online), 22 September 2020 <https://www.afr.com/policy/foreign-affairs/australian-chinese-trapped-between-beijing-bullies-and-canberra-spooks-20200922-p55xx6> (‘Beijing Bullies and Canberra Spooks’).

202. See, eg, Michael Head, ‘Australia’s Anti-Democratic ‘Foreign Interference’ Bills’ (2018) 43(3) Alternative Law Journal 160, 161.

203. See, eg, Joint Council for Civil Liberties, Submission No 31 to PJCIS, Parliament of Australia, Review of the National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2017 (14 February 2018).

204. EFI REM (n 76) 2 [2].

205. Clive Hamilton and Alex Joske, Submission No 20 to PJCIS, Parliament of Australia, Review of the National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2017 (22 January 2018) (‘Joske and Hamilton Submission No 20 to PJCIS’); Rory Medcalf, Submission No 33 to PJCIS, Parliament of Australia, Review of the National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2017 (15 February 2018).

206. Marc C Plattner, ‘Media and Democracy: The Long View’ (2012) 23(4) The Journal of Democracy 62, 65.

207. See generally Senate Environment and Communications References Committee, Parliament of Australia, Media Diversity in Australia (Report, December 2021).

208. Nationwide News Pty Ltd v Wills (1992) 177 CLR 1, 78–80 (Deane and Toohey JJ).

209. Joske and Hamilton Submission No 20 to PJCIS (n 205) 15–16.

210. Van der Kley, ‘The Influence of UF Work’ (n 198).

211. Ibid.

212. The Influence Environment (n 186) 13.

213. Aoweibang, ‘[Australian WeChat public accounts annual ranking]’, Aoweibang (online, undated) <https://web.archive.org/web/20200918005022/https://rank.aoweibang.com/rank/year/>.

214. The Influence Environment (n 186) 13.

215. Fergus Ryan, Audrey Fritz and Daria Impiombato, ASPI — International Cyber Policy Centre, TikTok and WeChat: Curating and Controlling Global Information Flows (Policy Brief, Report No 37/2020, September 2020) 24.

216. Mansted (n 12) 11.

217. The Influence Environment (n 186) 21.

218. Kelsey Munro and Philip Wen, ‘Chinese language newspapers in Australia: Beijing controls messaging, propaganda in press’, The Sydney Morning Herald (online), 8 July 2016 <http://archive.vn/P7jam>.

219. Levin (n 15) 190.

220. Rory Medcalf, ‘Australia and China: Understanding the Reality Check’ (2019) 73(2) Australian Journal of International Affairs 109, 114–15.

221. Ibid.

222. Criminal Code (n 5) s 92.2(2)(d).

223. EFI Second Reading Speech (n 1) 13146.

224. ASIO, ASIO Annual Report 2019–20 (Report, 2019) 4.

225. Naaman Zhou, ‘“Mafia State”: Protesters Rally against Cambodia PM Hun Sen’s Visit to Australia’, The Guardian (online), 16 March 2018 <https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/mar/16/mafia-state-protesters-rally-against-cambodia-pm-hun-sens-visit-to-australia>.

226. Ibid.

227. Spies in Our Suburbs (n 3).

228. Ibid.

229. Van der Kley, ‘The Influence of UF Work’ (n 198) 3.

230. Ibid.

231. ASIO, ASIO Annual Report 2017–18 (2018) 25.

232. EFI REM (n 76) 30 [134].

233. Ibid 195 [874].

234. LibertyWorks (n 9) 31–2 [95]–[96] (Gageler J), 67–8 [179] (Gordon J).

235. FITS Act (n 181) s 38.

236. Criminal Code (n 5) s 92.2.

237. LibertyWorks (n 9) 84 [219] (Edelman J).

238. Ibid 17 [50] (Kiefel CJ, Keane and Gleeson JJ), 31 [94]–[95] (Gageler J).

239. Ibid 21 [61] (Kiefel CJ, Keane and Gleeson JJ).

240. Ibid 4 [11] (Kiefel CJ, Keane and Gleeson JJ).

241. Ibid 2 [7] (Kiefel CJ, Keane and Gleeson JJ).

242. Ibid 80–1 [209] (Edelman J).

243. Ibid 24 [74] (Kiefel CJ, Keane and Gleeson JJ).

244. Ibid 24 [74] (Kiefel CJ, Keane and Gleeson JJ).

245. Zhang (n 6) 7 [19].

246. LibertyWorks (n 9) 23 [71] (Kiefel CJ, Keane and Gleeson JJ).

247. Ibid 24 [74] (Kiefel CJ, Keane and Gleeson JJ).

248. Ibid 32 [96] (Gageler J), 69 [182] (Gordon J), 86 [222] (Edelman J), 107 [288] (Steward J).

249. Ibid [95] (Gageler J); 67 [178] (Gordon J).

250. FITS Act (n 181) s 57.

251. Criminal Code (n 5) s 92.2.

252. McCloy (n 189) 216 [74] (French CJ, Kiefel, Bell and Keane JJ).

253. See, eg, Clubb v Edwards; Preston v Avery (2019) 366 ALR 1 [5] (Kiefel CJ, Bell and Keane JJ); Comcare v Banerji (2019) 372 ALR 42 [29] (Kiefel CJ, Bell, Keane and Nettle JJ); [188] (Edelman J).

254. Nyman Gibson Miralis Submission No 35 to PJCIS (n 174) 5.

255. (2017) 261 CLR 328 (‘Brown’).

256. Ibid 356 [77] (Kiefel CJ, Bell and Keane JJ).

257. Ryan (n 135) 75 (emphasis added).

258. ACTV (n 190) 187 (Dawson J).

259. Ibid 106–7.

260. Ibid 143–4 (Mason CJ).

261. Criminal Code (n 5) ss 92.2(1)(c)(i), 92.3(1)(c)(i).

262. Ibid ss 92.2(1)(c)(ii), 92.3(1)(c)(ii).

263. McCloy (n 189) 2 (French CJ, Kiefel, Bell and Keane JJ) citing Lange (n 188) 561–2, 567.

264. Ibid 24 [68].

265. Brown (n 255) 414–15 [273]–[275].

266. McCloy (n 189) 30 [84].

267. EFI REM (n 76) 12 [43].

268. Ibid 195 [872].

269. Ibid 91 [97].

270. PJCIS Report (n 75) 261 [758].

271. EFI REM (n 76) 12 [43].

272. McCloy (n 189) 24 [68].

273. Ibid 29 [80] citing Unions NSW v New South Wales (2013) 252 CLR 530, 557–8 [50]–[55], 561 [64], 579 [140], 586 [168] (‘Unions NSW No 1’).

274. EFI REM (n 76) 21 [95].

275. Ibid [97].

276. LibertyWorks (n 9) 17 [50], 27 [82] (Kiefel CJ, Keane and Gleeson JJ).

277. Unions NSW No 1 (n 273) 557 (French CJ, Hayne, Crennan, Kiefel and Bell JJ); LibertyWorks (n 9) 93 [239] (Edelman J).

278. Monis v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 92, 214 [347].

279. McCloy (n 189) 21 [57]; Lange (n 188) 568.

280. McCloy (n 189) 21 [57].

281. Ibid [58].

282. EFI REM (n 76) 23 [99]–[100].

283. Ibid 23–4 [101]–[105].

284. Ibid.

285. Ibid. See also Australian Security and Intelligence Organisation Act 1979 (Cth) (‘ASIO Act’) s 33.

286. FITS Act (n 181) ss 3–4.

287. Ibid s 13.

288. Ibid pt 5.

289. ACTV (n 190) 145–6 (Mason CJ).

290. Brown (n 255) 365 [109].

291. McCloy (n 189) 195 [2].

292. Ibid.

293. Ibid.

294. Tajjour v New South Wales (2014) 254 CLR 508, 580–1 [151].

295. Chief of the Defence Force v Gaynor (2017) 246 FCR 298, 310–12 [48]–[52]; Lange (n 188) 560.

296. Theophanous v Herald & Weekly Times Ltd (1994) 182 CLR 104, 149 (Brennan J).

297. EFI REM (n 76) 195 [872].

298. Van der Kley, ‘Beijing Bullies and Canberra Spooks’ (n 201).

299. Mansted (n 12) 16.

300. (2002) 202 CLR 629, 644 [28].

301. (2017) 261 CLR 306, 324 [32].

302. Zhang (n 6) 8 [21].

303. See van der Kley, ‘The Influence of UF Work’ (n 198) 4, Mansted (n 12) 18.

304. Ibid.

305. Melissa Conley Tyler and Julian Dusting, ‘What Should Australia do About … its Foreign Interference and Espionage Laws?’ China Matters (online), May 2021 <https://chinamatters.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/CME-May-2021-Foreign-Interference-Melissa-Conley-Tyler-and-Julian-Dusting.pdf>.

306. EFI Second Reading Speech (n 1) 13145.