SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Wikileaks Defies Australian Court's 'Blanket Censorship Order' by Publishing It
Founder Julian Assange says unprecedented government gag order is 'blindfolding the Australian public'
Jul 30, 2014
Wikileaks has revealed a secret court order in Australia to censor reporting on a massive, years-long political bribery and corruption scandal in the country involving its central bank and several international leaders. Described as a "superinjunction," the order blocks reporting on the order itself, as well as the content of the investigation, in a case of censorship that Wikileaks founder Julian Assange called "the worst in living memory."
Calling it "the largest high-level corruption case in Australia and the region," the media outlet on Wednesday published an order by the Supreme Court of Victoria in Melbourne that blocks news agencies from reporting on a multi-million dollar bribery investigation into subsidiaries of the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) and government officials in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Vietnam. Even now, Australian media is prevented from publishing the documents or its contents.
"[The] Australian government is not just gagging the Australian press, it is blindfolding the Australian public," Assange, who is Australian, said after the release of the documents. "This is not simply a question of the Australian government failing to give this international corruption case the public scrutiny it is due. Foreign Minister Julie Bishop must explain why she is threatening every Australian with imprisonment in an attempt to cover up an embarrassing corruption scandal involving the Australian government."
The court claimed that secrecy is necessary to prevent damage to Australia's relations with other countries and preserve the reputations of the high-ranking international officials. It also claimed that publicizing the case may put "national security" at risk, a familiar argument from many governments fighting to hide evidence of their misdeeds.
RBA subsidiaries Securency and Note Printing Australia are accused of paying off high-ranking officials from 1999 to 2004 to secure the supply of Australian-style polymer bank notes to the governments of Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam and other countries.
The gag order stated that the blanket censorship was "to prevent damage to Australia's international relations that may be caused by the publication of material that may damage the reputations of specified individuals who are not the subject of charges in these proceedings."
Assange responded to the court's justification of censorship by stating:
"The concept of 'national security' is not meant to serve as a blanket phrase to cover up serious corruption allegations involving government officials, in Australia or elsewhere. It is in the public interest for the press to be able to report on this case, which concerns the subsidiaries of the Australian central bank. Who is brokering our deals, and how are we brokering them as a nation? Corruption investigations and secret gag orders for 'national security' reasons are strange bedfellows."
The order was issued on June 19 after the secret indictment of several senior executives from Securency and Note Printing Australia. The investigation also explicitly named more than a dozen current and former heads of state from those countries, as well as their relatives and other high-ranking officials, who may have "received or attempted to receive a bribe" or been "willfully blind" to their colleagues receiving payoffs.
Wikileaks said the last blanket order of this magnitude was granted to a joint US-Australian spying operation against the Chinese Embassy in Canberra, the capital city of Australia.
Assange is currently living in the Ecuador embassy in London, where he has been granted political asylum on the grounds that he faces extradition and persecution in the U.S.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
Wikileaks has revealed a secret court order in Australia to censor reporting on a massive, years-long political bribery and corruption scandal in the country involving its central bank and several international leaders. Described as a "superinjunction," the order blocks reporting on the order itself, as well as the content of the investigation, in a case of censorship that Wikileaks founder Julian Assange called "the worst in living memory."
Calling it "the largest high-level corruption case in Australia and the region," the media outlet on Wednesday published an order by the Supreme Court of Victoria in Melbourne that blocks news agencies from reporting on a multi-million dollar bribery investigation into subsidiaries of the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) and government officials in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Vietnam. Even now, Australian media is prevented from publishing the documents or its contents.
"[The] Australian government is not just gagging the Australian press, it is blindfolding the Australian public," Assange, who is Australian, said after the release of the documents. "This is not simply a question of the Australian government failing to give this international corruption case the public scrutiny it is due. Foreign Minister Julie Bishop must explain why she is threatening every Australian with imprisonment in an attempt to cover up an embarrassing corruption scandal involving the Australian government."
The court claimed that secrecy is necessary to prevent damage to Australia's relations with other countries and preserve the reputations of the high-ranking international officials. It also claimed that publicizing the case may put "national security" at risk, a familiar argument from many governments fighting to hide evidence of their misdeeds.
RBA subsidiaries Securency and Note Printing Australia are accused of paying off high-ranking officials from 1999 to 2004 to secure the supply of Australian-style polymer bank notes to the governments of Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam and other countries.
The gag order stated that the blanket censorship was "to prevent damage to Australia's international relations that may be caused by the publication of material that may damage the reputations of specified individuals who are not the subject of charges in these proceedings."
Assange responded to the court's justification of censorship by stating:
"The concept of 'national security' is not meant to serve as a blanket phrase to cover up serious corruption allegations involving government officials, in Australia or elsewhere. It is in the public interest for the press to be able to report on this case, which concerns the subsidiaries of the Australian central bank. Who is brokering our deals, and how are we brokering them as a nation? Corruption investigations and secret gag orders for 'national security' reasons are strange bedfellows."
The order was issued on June 19 after the secret indictment of several senior executives from Securency and Note Printing Australia. The investigation also explicitly named more than a dozen current and former heads of state from those countries, as well as their relatives and other high-ranking officials, who may have "received or attempted to receive a bribe" or been "willfully blind" to their colleagues receiving payoffs.
Wikileaks said the last blanket order of this magnitude was granted to a joint US-Australian spying operation against the Chinese Embassy in Canberra, the capital city of Australia.
Assange is currently living in the Ecuador embassy in London, where he has been granted political asylum on the grounds that he faces extradition and persecution in the U.S.
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
Wikileaks has revealed a secret court order in Australia to censor reporting on a massive, years-long political bribery and corruption scandal in the country involving its central bank and several international leaders. Described as a "superinjunction," the order blocks reporting on the order itself, as well as the content of the investigation, in a case of censorship that Wikileaks founder Julian Assange called "the worst in living memory."
Calling it "the largest high-level corruption case in Australia and the region," the media outlet on Wednesday published an order by the Supreme Court of Victoria in Melbourne that blocks news agencies from reporting on a multi-million dollar bribery investigation into subsidiaries of the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) and government officials in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Vietnam. Even now, Australian media is prevented from publishing the documents or its contents.
"[The] Australian government is not just gagging the Australian press, it is blindfolding the Australian public," Assange, who is Australian, said after the release of the documents. "This is not simply a question of the Australian government failing to give this international corruption case the public scrutiny it is due. Foreign Minister Julie Bishop must explain why she is threatening every Australian with imprisonment in an attempt to cover up an embarrassing corruption scandal involving the Australian government."
The court claimed that secrecy is necessary to prevent damage to Australia's relations with other countries and preserve the reputations of the high-ranking international officials. It also claimed that publicizing the case may put "national security" at risk, a familiar argument from many governments fighting to hide evidence of their misdeeds.
RBA subsidiaries Securency and Note Printing Australia are accused of paying off high-ranking officials from 1999 to 2004 to secure the supply of Australian-style polymer bank notes to the governments of Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam and other countries.
The gag order stated that the blanket censorship was "to prevent damage to Australia's international relations that may be caused by the publication of material that may damage the reputations of specified individuals who are not the subject of charges in these proceedings."
Assange responded to the court's justification of censorship by stating:
"The concept of 'national security' is not meant to serve as a blanket phrase to cover up serious corruption allegations involving government officials, in Australia or elsewhere. It is in the public interest for the press to be able to report on this case, which concerns the subsidiaries of the Australian central bank. Who is brokering our deals, and how are we brokering them as a nation? Corruption investigations and secret gag orders for 'national security' reasons are strange bedfellows."
The order was issued on June 19 after the secret indictment of several senior executives from Securency and Note Printing Australia. The investigation also explicitly named more than a dozen current and former heads of state from those countries, as well as their relatives and other high-ranking officials, who may have "received or attempted to receive a bribe" or been "willfully blind" to their colleagues receiving payoffs.
Wikileaks said the last blanket order of this magnitude was granted to a joint US-Australian spying operation against the Chinese Embassy in Canberra, the capital city of Australia.
Assange is currently living in the Ecuador embassy in London, where he has been granted political asylum on the grounds that he faces extradition and persecution in the U.S.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.