Australian Police Chief Seeks Terror Reporting Ban

DJMajah writes "News.com.au reports that Australian Federal Police chief Mick Keelty has called for a media blackout on reporting of terrorism investigations and cases before trial in a speech to the Sydney Institute last night. Although he doesn't believe public institutions should be immune from public accountability, he goes on to say that public discussion should be delayed until information is made available by the courts or legal proceedings are complete. This all comes after last year's widely reported case of Dr. Mohammed Haneef who was detained then later deported from Australia on evidence described as weak — and seen by some, including Haneef, as a conspiracy."

Comments

1984

[pwnies]

If the media can only report what the courts tell them, then who's to say that the information isn't censored? Seems very 1984ish to me. If Australia takes this step, it's only a matter of time before they're creating news altogether.

Re:1984

[tpgp]

If Australia takes this step,

I don't think Australia's likely to take this step, the person asking for this is the dumbass cop who arrested an innocent man to attempt to test new anti-terror laws (his relationship with the previous Australian government also suggests he did it for political gain).

Read this article for a better understanding of the Haneef case.

The current government does not support the calls to censor the media.

Re:1984

[MightyMartian]

Yes, the current government merely wants to set up a list of forbidden sites that you have to opt into to view.

Sorry, but these pack of freedom-hating political hacks ain't that much different than Howard's bunch of freedom-hating political hacks.

Re:1984

[Anonymous Coward]

"This all comes after last years widely reported case of Dr. Mohammed Haneef who was detained then later deported from Australia on evidence described as weak"
It was not just weak, it was falsified.

It is precisely because of how they handled the Haneef case that they *should* be scrutinised, monitored, and observed, every step of the way.

Re:1984

[Jesus_666]

That's true - for regular trials. But here we have trials for nebulously defined "terrorism", which you can just randomly (from your perspective) end up in with no proper charges raised against you. They're putting people to trial because they feel like it and just being the defendant in such a trial means that you'll probably be regarded a terrorism risk by many nations.

It's scary enough that they can do that. The process requires absolute and total transparency as far as possible without revealing security-relevant information. Nobody should be randomly tried without everyone knowing about it, especially not in such a potentially life-ruining way. And the people should know about it when it happens, not after the fact.

Secret above-the-law trials are just about the last thing we need. Manipulating data after the fact is easy, hence any special terrorist trials should be broadcasted live. By more then one source.

Are you kidding me?

[metlin]

Wow, seriously.

It always starts small -- shut down the press for this reason, and then expand and control.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. I simply cannot believe that people would make such recommendations, and not understand the import of their intent.

It's one thing for a tin-pot dictator in the middle of nowhere to do so, and it is quite another for someone in a position of authority in a western-styled democracy to make such statements. Then again, could be that the position of authority is what's making him make such statements.

I am just... baffled.

Not supported by the Governement

[Anonymous Coward]

The Federal Government and the Prime Minister have said they have no intentions of doing this.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/rudd-blacks-out-keeltys-opinion/2008/01/31/1201714110077.html

It's just not fair!

[hyades1]

Those poor Australian police. All that open, free society stuff is just so darned inconvenient when you want to make sure some guy's enjoying the attentions of an Egyptian torturer before news of his arrest is published.

If I was Osama, I'd be laughing myself sick watching these clowns destroy that nasty, evil free society I hate so much. I couldn't do a better job with another hundred planes.

Halt to criticism of Keelty

[nbauman]

Here's where Keelty gets to the point:

He also called for a halt to criticism of public institutions.

He's calling for an end to criticism of government institutions, specifically himself. This is particularly inappropriate given his record of incompetence and false charges against Mohammed Haneef.

Wouldn't we all like to be protected from criticism of ourselves and our incompetence.

Re:He's copped a right caning for it...

[pnevin]

Keelty's got form. One of the reasons why the Haneef case fell apart was because the guy's barrister released the transcript of Haneef's police interviews to the press, as a response to repeated damaging AFP leaks and also to show what a confused mess the AFP's case actually was. As a result, Keelty is seeking to have the lawyer struck off for unprofessional conduct.

Keelty always had an enthusiastic ear in the last government, who were desperately seeking another Tampa in an election year. The new government, thankfully, appears to be treating matters a bit more soberly.