A whistleblower organization claims a secret list of Web sites that Australian authorities are proposing to ban includes such innocuous destinations as a dentist's office.

Australian Communications and Media Authority says it will fine people who hyperlink to sites on its blacklist, which has been further expanded to include several pages on the anonymous whistleblower site Wikileaks.

Wikileaks was added to the blacklist for publishing a leaked document containing Denmark's list of banned websites.

The move by the Australian Communications and Media Authority comes after it threatened the host of online broadband discussion forum Whirlpool last week with a $11,000-a-day fine over a link published in its forum to another page blacklisted by ACMA - an anti-abortion website.

ACMA's blacklist does not have a significant impact on web browsing by Australians today but sites contained on it will be blocked for everyone if the Federal Government implements its mandatory internet filtering censorship scheme.

But even without the mandatory censorship scheme, as is evident in the Whirlpool case, ACMA can force sites hosted in Australia to remove "prohibited" pages and even links to prohibited pages.

The Slippery Slope

Online civil liberties campaigners have seized on the move by ACMA as evidence of how casually the regulator adds to its list of blacklisted sites. It also confirmed fears that the scope of the Government's censorship plan could easily be expanded to encompass sites that are not illegal.

"The first rule of censorship is that you cannot talk about censorship," Wikileaks said on its website in response to the ACMA ban.

Wikileaks also accused Australia of "acting like a democratic backwater," and said "Australian democracy must not be permitted to sleep with this loaded gun." The site -- which casts itself as an outlet for "untraceable mass document leaking and analysis," with a focus on exposing oppressive regimes and unethical behavior -- did not explain how it obtained the purported blacklist.  

Parental Responsibility, Not Nanny State

Opposition communications spokesman Nick Minchin said the leaking of the list was irresponsible but highlighted how this type of information could surface despite the efforts of ACMA to protect it, and could be used by those with a perverse interest in its content.

"The regrettable and unfortunate reality is there will always be explicit and illegal material on the web and - regardless of blacklists, filters and the like - those with the means and know-how will find ways of accessing it," he said.

"Adult supervision is the most effective way of keeping children safe online and people shouldn't be led into believing by Labor that expanded blacklists or mandatory filters are a substitute for that."

Colin Jacobs, spokesman for the online users' lobby group Electronic Frontiers Australia, said the leak was not surprising and would only get worse once the list was sent to hundreds of Australian ISPs as part of the Government's mandatory internet filtering policy.

He said the Government could be considered a "promoter and disseminator of links to some pretty unsavoury material".

Wikileaks vs Conroy

Senator Conroy yesterday issued a statement in response to the release of the Australian Internet censorship list by Wikileaks, saying that his department, "is investigating this matter and is considering a range of possible actions it may take including referral to the Australian Federal Police. Any Australian involved in making this content publicly available would be at serious risk of criminal prosecution."

Describing Senator Conroy as the person "responsible for Australian Internet censorship", Jay Lim, the legal adviser of Wikileaks publisher Sunshine Press stated:

"Under the Swedish Constitution's Press Freedom Act, the right of a confidential press source to anonymity is protected, and criminal penalties apply to anyone acting to breach that right.

"Source documents are received in Sweden and published from Sweden so as to derive maximum benefit from this legal protection.

"Should the Senator or anyone else attempt to discover our source we will refer the matter to the Constitutional Police for prosecution, and if necessary, ask that the Senator and anyone else involved be extradited to face justice for breaching fundamental rights."

Referring to a precedent case earlier this year, Wikileaks stated:

"Senator Conroy may wish to consider the position of the South African Competition Commission, which decided to cancel its own high profile leak investigation in January after being advised of the legal ramifications of interfering with Sunshine Press sources." 

Related Stories

Children's welfare groups slam net filters 5 dec  |  Children's welfare groups slam net filters . . read more

Big brother filter plan insults parents 23 jan  |  Big brother filter plan insults parents  . . read more

The State of Censorship in Australia 5 nov  |  Libertus.net was set up and is maintained by Irene Graham and covers the current state and history of censorship in Australia as it relates to film, books, magazines, games and internet. . . read more

No Internet Censorship for Australia 22 oct  |  Internet Censorship for Australia? . . read more

Palm Island uprising leader gets six years 11 nov  |  Palm Island uprising leader gets six years . . read more

Electronic Frontiers Australia 19 aug  |  Fighting for online freedom in Australia . . read more