I nternational attention has again focused on WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange this week as he lost the first round of his efforts to avoid extradition to Sweden to face interrogation concerning sexual misconduct and charges. As is so often the case, much of the media is more preoccupied with Assange than the secret information published on the WikiLeaks website or the reactions of governments to those disclosures.

 

In the case of Australia, Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Attorney- General Robert McClelland revealed just how little regard they have for the rule of law and due process when they think their political interests might be under threat. Both McClelland and Gillard were quick out of the box as soon as WikiLeaks and its media partners commenced publication of a vast trove of leaked United States diplomatic cables on November 28 last year. The Australian Government had been forewarned by the US Government about the imminent download of diplomatic secrets.

 

McClelland took the lead at a doorstop press conference at Parliament House on Monday, November 29, little more than 12 hours after the first ''Cablegate'' stories appeared in the press in Europe and America. ''Every indication is that some of the documentation could relate to national security classified documentation,'' McClelland said. ''It is a matter that is taken with the utmost seriousness by the Government of the United States and certainly the Government of Australia and obviously governments around the world. The release of this information could prejudice the safety of people referred to in the documentation and indeed, could be damaging to the national security interests of the United States and its allies, including Australia.''

 

McClelland went on to observe that the Australian Government would support ''any law enforcement action that may be taken,'' and that while the US would be the lead government he would task the Australian Federal Police pursue the issue as ''to whether any Australian laws have been breached.'' Asked by a journalist whether Assange was ''the most wanted man in Australia'', McClelland elaborated that ''certainly from Australia's point of view, we think there are potentially a number of criminal laws that could have been breached by the release of this information ... [including] giving away national security information or publicising national security-sensitive information and documentation, but also potentially offences relating to places and the source of documentation as well.''

 

McClelland announced that an interdepartmental taskforce would examine security issues relating to WikiLeaks, and we now know that the Secretary of the Attorney- General's Department, Roger Wilkins, wrote to the Australian Federal Police the next day, November 30, to refer the matter for criminal investigation. On December 2, as international controversy about the publication of the US embassy cables grew, Gillard weighed into the matter. Asked by a radio talkback show host whether she'd been briefed about WikiLeaks, she said yes, adding that ''we have a whole process to go through all of this information, I mean, millions of pieces of information and assess the implications for us.'' Gillard then gave Assange both barrels. ''I absolutely condemn the placement of this information on the WikiLeaks website, it's a grossly irresponsible thing to do, and an illegal thing to do,'' she said. This was strong stuff, especially given the fact that no US cables relating to Australia had actually been published at this time.

 

It was not until four days later that the first cable containing a significant reference to Australia was published in Britain, and it was not until December 8 that Fairfax newspapers commenced the publication of a series of stories by this writer that were based on cables from the US embassy in Canberra.

 

Thanks to questions asked in Senate Estimates hearings this week, it is now confirmed that the Australian Government did not see any of the leaked US cables or receive a detailed briefing before McClelland and Gillard's remarks. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton contacted Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd on November 25 to express her regrets that the material had been leaked. However, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade Secretary Dennis Richardson told a Senate Estimates committee on Thursday that it was a long time, and only after repeated representations before Australian officials had a detailed briefing. ''It took a frustrating amount of time,'' Richardson said. Even then Australia was ''spectacularly unsuccessful'' in its attempts to obtain copies of US cables. McClelland and Gillard's references to possible, indeed actual criminality were thus made without any specific details of the information that had been leaked to WikiLeaks or what the website or any other media organisation might publish that concerned Australia.

 

More background on the Labor Government's initial responses to ''Cablegate'' was also disclosed this week by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, and the Attorney-General's Department.

Questioned by Liberal senator Russell Trood, National Security Adviser Duncan Lewis confirmed that PM&C has been leading a whole- of-government taskforce dealing with WikiLeaks. However, Deputy National Security Adviser Margot McCarthy was at pains to emphasise that the taskforce was not conducting an investigation, that being a matter for the Australian Federal Police, but was concerned with broader issues arising from the cables. The AFP employed six officers to evaluate material that had become publicly available through WikiLeaks. On December 17, it found it had ''not established the existence of any criminal offences where Australia would have jurisdiction''. But anyone with a passing knowledge with the Commonwealth's official secrets laws could have reached this conclusion within minutes, not 17 days. This does leave the question of what if any legal advice McClelland and Gillard had at hand when they canvassed the alleged criminality of WikiLeaks' publication of the cables.

 

The answer appears to be none at all.

 

The Hansard record of the Senate Estimates hearing for the Attorney- General's Department last Tuesday records the following exchange between Liberal shadow attorney- general George Brandis and Attorney-General's Department secretary Wilkins.

 

Brandis: ''As you are aware, the Prime Minister on 2 December said in relation to the placement of material on the WikiLeaks website by Mr Assange and those working for that organisation: 'It's a grossly irresponsible thing to do and an illegal thing to do.' That was in response directly to a question concerning Mr Assange himself.'' Wilkins: ''Who said that?'' Brandis: ''The Prime Minister. What I would like to know is whether your department gave any advice to government about the legality or otherwise of the conduct of Mr Assange or WikiLeaks in relation to the posting of classified information on the WikiLeaks website.'' Wilkins: ''No.'' Brandis: ''Thank you.''

 

The publication of the cables caused the Government intense embarrassment, especially for Rudd whose political and diplomatic failings were comprehensively recorded by US diplomats. But at Senate Estimates this week there was no mention of grave national security implications arising from the US cables disclosures. Maybe we should all be just a bit more sceptical the next time a politician tries to use national security or unspecified allegations of criminality to attack someone who might be exposing some inconvenient truths.