Pubdate: Sun, 01 Jul 2001 Source: Sun-Herald (Australia) Copyright: 2001 John Fairfax Holdings Ltd Contact: http://www.sunherald.com.au/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/431 Author: Brian Toohey Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/corrupt.htm (Corruption) DRUGS, SPIES AND POWER WITHOUT LIMIT The combination of spies and drugs does not have a happy history. Which is one reason it's not a good idea to let spies get mixed up in the illegal drug trade while giving them immunity from the law. Yet this explosive mix is sanctioned by the Intelligence Services Bill introduced into Federal Parliament last week. The bill also authorises large-scale electronic eavesdropping on Australian citizens and companies in apparent contravention of laws prohibiting telephone intercepts. Despite some filters, the information can be then passed to other countries engaged in commercial espionage against Australian firms. In addition, the legislation could harm Australian environmental, aid and human rights groups. If foreign governments complain about their activities, these groups are not protected from harassment by Australian intelligence agencies. Foreign Affairs Minister Alexander Downer introduced the bill 25 years after a royal commission, chaired by the late Robert Hope, said legislative backing was needed for the activities of the Australian Secret Intelligence Service and the Defence Signals Directorate. One reason for the delay is that the legislation has not been easy to frame while maintaining respect for the law. Much of what ASIS does - running spies overseas - breaks international or Australian laws. Similar legal problems bedevil DSD's use of satellite ground stations for intercepting vast numbers of phone calls, faxes and e-mails. Unlike ASIS, however, DSD does not bribe foreign nationals to commit the crime of treason. Despite being a judge of the NSW Supreme Court, Hope enthusiastically advocated that both ASIS and DSD commit illegal acts, including breaking and entering diplomatic premises in Canberra. Downer has now tried to skirt the legal obstacles by effectively putting both bodies above the law. The new bill gives a blanket immunity to ASIS or DSD employees - and ministers - who break Australian laws in the course of their duties. Breaches of international law, as well as other countries' espionage laws, are ignored. The immunity is far more sweeping than anything enjoyed by the Australian Federal Police or ASIS's domestic counterpart, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation. The AFP can buy drugs during an undercover operation, but only under the strictest controls. ASIO can tap telephones, but only with a special warrant for particular phone numbers and only for a limited time. Although ASIS was set up in 1952 to collect national security information, it has expanded into gathering economic intelligence. Now the Howard Government wants it to penetrate overseas drug rings. Unfortunately, the huge amount of money in the drug trade and the clandestine world of spying has proved a volatile combination. The corrupt involvement of members of the US Central Intelligence Agency in drugs is well documented in books such as Al McCoy's The Politics Of Heroin In South Asia. Notorious drug traffickers, including the former Panamanian president, Manuel Noriega, enjoyed CIA protection for many years. While the new bill is supposed to protect the privacy of Australian citizens, this can be over-ridden by other provisions. Unlike the safeguards contained in New Zealand intelligence laws, members of Australian non-government organisations could be targeted by ASIS and DSD if their activities were felt to be harming relations with another country. A future Malaysian or Indonesian government, for example, could complain about an Australian non-government organisation (NGO) campaigning against the logging of rainforests in Borneo. ASIS and DSD could then monitor the NGO's phones. The NGO's computers could be hacked into, money could be stolen by electronic access to its bank accounts, as has occurred in operations by British intelligence agencies. The new bill prohibits physical violence by ASIS. Australian agents could not follow the example of their French counterparts, who killed a Greenpeace member while blowing up the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland harbour in the 1980s. But the bill lacks adequate safeguards against damaging intelligence being given to the Malaysians or Indonesians, who might have fewer scruples about the use of violence. ASIS should be explicitly prohibited from doing anything which could harm Australian citizens. It should leave drugs to the police or Customs and concentrate on its national security role. If ASIS or DSD officers break Australian laws without a specific warrant issued by a court, they should be arrested and charged like anyone else. Otherwise, the Government should forget about lecturing others about the rule of law. - --- MAP posted-by: Josh Sutcliffe