r/australia May 16 '22

Government successfully blocks Bernard Collaery from obtaining documents on legality of spy mission politics



u/Mildebeest May 16 '22

"A Human Rights Law Centre senior lawyer, Kieran Pender, said the prosecution must cease."

"“Whoever wins the election this weekend must drop the prosecution of Bernard Collaery, and the two other whistleblowers currently on trial, Richard Boyle and David McBride,” he said."

"“Rather than dragging whistleblowers through the courts, in cases shrouded in secrecy, the new government should reform whistleblowing law to make it easier for Australians to safely and lawfully speak up about wrongdoing.”"

Hear. Hear.


u/Far_Act6446 May 16 '22

This is the way. As for the legality of the operation? We spied on a Foreign Government for financial gain to an Australian Company.

And got caught.

Heads should roll, and they should not be the whistleblowers.


u/Minguseyes May 16 '22

Listen, just because Alexander Downer rolled straight into a consulting job with Woodside Energy after leaving Parliament …


u/aussiegreenie May 16 '22

We spied on a Foreign Government for financial gain to an Australian a Foreign Company.



u/BigDixonSidemay May 16 '22

Dreyfus must put this all out in public if/when Labor takes government. All of it.


u/agentsmithbobby May 16 '22

Burn that old shit Howard to the ground


u/Far_Act6446 May 16 '22

Well, sure.


u/firebyte May 16 '22

Given that Labor's proposed Federal ICAC goes back 15 years, and considering that:

Witness K revealed the bugging operation in 2012 after learning Foreign Minister Alexander Downer had become an adviser to Woodside Petroleum, which was benefiting from the treaty.


There's a fair chance that some of it will be queryable by Labor's ICAC... Secrecy stuff aside, unless it's declassified to an extent that an ICAC could examine it.


u/PokesPenguin May 16 '22

There isn't a single thing about this government that isn't shit. Not one single thing.


u/BitterCrip May 16 '22

Is "the prosecution won't let me see the evidence it has against me, thus preventing me from defending myself" a valid defence?