politics | ABC News Australia |
The federal government is defending its moves to prevent national security funding documents from being considered by the Bondi Royal Commission into anti-Semitism. Attorney General Michelle Rowland argues cabinet documents routinely attract public interest immunity.
The federal government is defending its decision to claim public interest immunity over national security funding documents that the Bondi Royal Commission into anti-Semitism and social cohesion has sought to examine. The cabinet documents relate to government deliberations about resourcing for counter-terrorism in the years before the Bondi terror attack.
Attorney General Michelle Rowland argued there is nothing novel about protecting cabinet documents from public disclosure, stating it is a well-established legal principle. She emphasised that the final decision rests with Royal Commissioner Virginia Bell, who has the authority to review the documents and determine whether they should be released.
The issue emerged during the Commission's examination of how agencies like ASIO balanced their resources and priorities in the years leading up to the attack. ASIO's Director General referenced the government's public interest immunity claims in written statements to the Commission, highlighting tensions between transparency and national security.
The Commission has been investigating how ASIO balanced counter-terrorism priorities alongside growing challenges in areas such as foreign interference and counter-espionage. Questions about whether adequate resources were allocated to prevent the Bondi attack are central to the inquiry's work.
Shadow Home Affairs Minister Jono Duniam criticised the government's stance, arguing the Royal Commission must be able to examine the full range of information in the interest of transparency. The opposition maintains the government could voluntarily release the documents to demonstrate accountability, as reported by ABC News Australia.