Division 82 of the Criminal Code contains offences of committing sabotage, planning or preparing a sabotage offence, and for introducing a vulnerability into 'public infrastructure'. Part 5.2 of the Criminal Code contains offences for...
moreDivision 82 of the Criminal Code contains offences of committing sabotage, planning or preparing a sabotage offence, and for introducing a vulnerability into 'public infrastructure'. Part 5.2 of the Criminal Code contains offences for espionage (Division 91), foreign interference (Division 92), and theft of trade secrets (Division 92A). Part 5.2 also contains provisions relating to prosecutions and hearings of these offences, and the forfeiture of articles used in offending against the Part (Divisions 93 and 94). The Monitor has released an Issues Paper (available below from the 'Document' drop-down menu below) to explain key issues being considered in the review. These include: INSLM Review of Australia's espionage, foreign interference, sabotage and theft of trade secrets offences (Division 82 and Part 5.2 Criminal Code Act 1995) 5. Whilst the UK has begun taking steps to bring transparency into its property market and expose transnational criminal activity involving investments in UK property assets, Australia is yet to do the same. It appears that the role of the Attorney General is being used to block investigation and prosecution of genuine espionage, foreign inference, sabotage and theft of trade secret matters. Further, it seems that parts of Australia's national security establishment are directly involved in committing those crimes, up to and including terrorism finance and terrorism activities and that Jake Blight, the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor is actively attempting to redefine "terrorism" and "terrorism finance" in Australia. The risk is that the INSLM is not independent from the Attorney General and is attempting to change the legal scope of terrorism and terrorism finance to try to indemnify public servants who've committed those crimes under the current definition. See also: Defining terrorism: Review of the definition of a 'terrorist act' in section 100.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 | INSLM. 6. I note that very serious issues exist in Australia with asset stripping activities associated with tax fraud. I saw it first hand myself as Finance Manager of Quaker Oats (Australasia) P/L, back in 1996 -the use of transfer pricing to avoid Australian tax was a crime, even back then. And it has grown enormously since then. And whilst a lot of noise has been made about PwC's role in tax fraud, there is a dearth of prosecutions. By contrast, in other countries, people who are successfully prosecuted for large scale, systemic tax fraud, typically go to prison. Until we see that routinely happening here in Australia, I believe it is safe to say that the issues are still being covered up because they involve senior Australian politicians and politically exposed persons and that is allowing white collar criminals to treat the penalties they receive as just another cost of doing business and not a genuine sanction they should fear. 7. I am the primary whistleblower on the Greensill Scandal. I worked directly with Lex Greensill at Citibank in Dublin and London. His business, Greensill Capital, got started after the British Cabinet Office stole a trade secret … my role in creating the original concept for the Obama Administration's SupplierPay Pledge policy. It gave credit to Greensill for my work because the UK and Australian Governments want to keep covered up the role of senior politicians, senior military leaders, senior academic leaders and senior secret services personnel in espionage, foreign interference, sabotage, theft of trade secrets, terrorism and terrorism finance operations against minority groups in Australia including our dairy farming families, Aboriginal tribes and millions of young Australians from poor families. So far, I have not received an apology, acknowledgement of my role creating the concept for the Obama Administration's SupplierPay Pledge, nor restitution of the assets that were stripped from me and compensation for the losses I personally incurred as a result of the UK and Australian Governments' criminal activities. I further note that restitution has not yet been made to the minority groups whose interests were harmed by the UK and Australian Governments' criminal activities. 1.2 What evidence is there that the new offences have had a negative effect on academic collaboration, press freedom or other legitimate activities?