As I see it | Are Australia’s foreign interference laws unfairly targeting expats in Chinese and foreign markets?

It’s the stuff of spy novels and bygone cold-war years. The mysterious arrest of Australian businessman Alexander Csergo earlier this month should send shivers down the spines of many Australians overseas. He was charged with “reckless foreign interference” under some fairly new laws for having provided open-source information to Chinese clients about Australia’s economic and defence matters, including the lithium sector and the security tie-up, Aukus. Working for foreign companies, countries or companies linked to foreign states has become a serious occupational hazard overnight. Especially if the “foreign” bit is China. Most people would probably know little about the National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Act and Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme Act, introduced in 2018. While never formally aimed at China, they were introduced at the height of a media frenzy over alleged “foreign interference” by China – examples include Chinese businessmen being accused of buying political favours through donations and media accusations of public servants supposedly linked to the Communist Party. Still, no laid-back Australian can be blamed for choosing to ignore them. Espionage is not something everyday Australians wonder about having accidentally committed. Speeding, maybe. But Csergo happens to be like many Australians who work in the Chinese market and therefore, interact with Chinese businesses and companies. This is no accident. China is, after all, Australia’s largest trading partner by a mile and Canberra had encouraged Australian businesses to chase the dollars in the Chinese market. The key worry now is that these laws criminalising acts of foreign interference for the first time in Australia are making “Australia one of the only Western liberal democracies to have made foreign interference a crime”, according to University of Queensland academic Sarah Kendall. Kendall is not the only academic or group to criticise the laws; many have written about how they have undermined Australia’s democracy. Would Australians now have to rethink their livelihoods, or worse, constantly look over their shoulders for black suits waiting to sling a black bag over their heads? Intelligence agencies claim that these laws will help make Australians aware of what “foreign interference” looks like. Deterrence is key. But foreign interference certainly does not look like the marketing businessman Csergo who charges for reports based on information that anyone can Google or look up in the library. Weren’t these hallmarks of authoritarian countries? There’s a caveat. If you’re open and transparent about who you represent or do business with and declare all your interests, you will not be targeted. Actions must be “covert” so meetings with individuals such as Csergo’s clients who are known only by their first names and are allegedly Chinese spooks, gets you caught. But to know what “covert” looks like, the man on the street needs more details. Details about how much Csergo knew about his clients, however, are hush-hush at the moment. Japan, Australia to share intelligence on ‘China’s intentions’ in security deal Attempts to get court documents and other materials related to the case will be met with stiff gatekeeping by the courts. Lawyers too say they have had a hard time with access and that government opaqueness has increased over time. If the case does not go to trial or if it goes into a secret trial – yes, Australia does that too – we may never know either. If Canberra wants people to be transparent, they too must be transparent otherwise all they do is strike fear in the hearts and minds of people. Again, stuff that autocrat states are made of. Csergo is the second person to be charged under these laws. Another Australian man, Sunny Duong was the first to be charged in 2020 for the vague act of “preparing for a foreign interference offence” and his case too has been shrouded in secrecy. In fact, anyone, not just Australians can be charged. The Australian Lawyers for Human Rights has said these laws “violate the fundamental universal human rights to freedom of speech and freedom of expression for persons in Australia”. And now one person sits in a prison wondering if pursuing the kind of global business that is still encouraged by the Australian government might have cost him his freedom. Su-Lin Tan is a correspondent at the Post’s Asia desk.

.css-1m2rp1p{color:#34b8b5;}As I see it | Are Australia’s foreign interference laws unfairly targeting expats in Chinese and foreign markets?

As I see it | Are Australia’s foreign interference laws unfairly targeting expats in Chinese and foreign markets?