Almost exactly two years ago, the Australian Federal Police executed a search warrant at the ABC’s headquarters in Ultimo, Sydney. That raid, and the search the day before of News Corp reporter Annika Smethurst’s home, produced an outcry. But what has happened since? Two inquiries, two reports, and precious little else, reports ABC Alumni’s press freedom spokesperson Jonathan Holmes. Australia still suffers from ‘excessive and unnecessary secrecy’.

In Part 2 of this essay on issues surrounding defamation law (see Part 1: ‘Ghosts Can’t Sue’), Jonathan Holmes looks at the Federal Court, which has become the forum of choice for defamation plaintiffs, including Ben Roberts-Smith and Christian Porter.  Why?  Largely because trial by jury is not available in the Federal Court.  Almost two years ago, the Council of Attorneys-General agreed that this should change.  So far, it has not.

Recently ABC iview has started asking users to create an account and log in to use iview. This change has been in the works for several years and the roll-out, which is planned to be mandatory from July 2021, is being met with some scepticism. Here’s what the Alumni’s tech expert Peter Marks has to say …

The three-part investigation of the 1979 Luna Park Ghost Train fire by the ABC’s Exposed team reminded Jonathan Holmes of the time almost forty years ago when Four Corners took on NSW Premier Neville Wran. In this special article for ABC Alumni, Jonathan recalls the challenges to investigative journalism posed then, as now, by Australia’s defamation laws – and asks whether new amendments, which come into force in some states in July, will make any difference. Perhaps, he writes, they will. But don’t hold your breath.

Quentin Dempster discusses potential risks of the ABC entering into precedent-setting commercial relationships with online providers. Will it, he asks, make it easier for any hostile future federal government to demand more commerciality, not less, and soften up the ABC for partial or whole privatisation?

A new kind of censorship sweeping Malaysia is threatening journalists, critics, whistle-blowers and online news sites. 

The Muhyiddin Yassin government, which came to power in March this year, has made it clear that it will not tolerate any criticism or dissent.

The new strategy is to delegitimise and criminalise those who are seen as exposing, investigating or questioning anything the government is doing.

It’s recent crackdowns on the media and freedom of speech are akin to actions taken by authoritarian regimes such as Turkey, Venezuela and the Philippines.  

The ABC has historically been flexible with the technologies it uses to transmit its content to consumers. Today’s technology landscape is changing faster than ever and the ABC must continue to straddle the old and the new if it is to remain available to contemporary as well as traditional audiences. The Alumni’s tech expert Peter Marks surveys the ABC’s tech history and the current state of broadcasting technology..

The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security published its long-awaited report on “the impact of the exercise of law enforcement and intelligence powers on the freedom of the press” in mid-2020. ABC Alumni press freedom spokesman Jonathan Holmes finds its proposed solutions “fall sadly short”.

The committee has not seriously considered a Media Freedom Act nor exemption from prosecution for journalists genuinely engaged in public interest journalism. Instead, theyrely on the use of Public Interest Advocates, whose activities are anything but Public, and who are not allowed to consult with the people on whose behalf they are advocating. And the Committee has left unremarked the use by the Australian Federal Police of an offence for which the ABC’s Daniel Oakes faces prosecution, and which threatens any journalist who receives any information of any sort from any Commonwealth agency.

In February 2020 the ABC suffered a crushing defeat in the Federal Court, in its challenge to the validity of an AFP search warrant on its Ultimo headquarters relating to a series of stories known as The Afghan Files. Jonathan Holmes has been following the case closely and offers these observations of the judgment.