Abstract:
The September 11 2001 terror attacks in the United States prompted governments internationally to pass new national security laws, partly in response to United Nations conventions and protocols.1 In the UK the issue of open justice has been debated in the context of the Justice and Security Bill,2 where proposed provisions would allow the civil courts to be closed when hearing sensitive national security evidence.3 A comparative context can shed light on such debate and offer new perspectives, particularly when the comparison focuses on a Western democracy like Australia with close historical connections to the UK. The Australian Parliament passed at least 544 legislative instruments related to national security and counter-terrorism in the 2001–11 period, with some having potential implications for open justice and news reporting. This article reviews the stated purpose of selected Australian national security laws; examines cases where they appeared to impinge upon the role of the news media and open justice; questions the actual implications of such laws for the Fourth Estate functions of journalism in a democracy lacking free expression protections in human rights instruments or its Constitution;5 and offers some points of similarity and contrast with the UK and the US.
Description:
Copyright of Journal of Media Law is the property of Hart Publishing Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
