By Denis Hay
Description
Are Australia’s security agencies protecting the public or shielding power? Discover how ASIO and the police are used to control dissent, not safeguard democracy.
Introduction: When Justice Feels Like the Enemy
“I never imagined I could be treated like a criminal for speaking out. But the day the police knocked on my door for attending a peaceful protest, I realised Australia isn’t the country I thought it was.”
This isn’t a scene from an authoritarian regime. It happened to Claire, a Brisbane schoolteacher and climate activist. Her crime? Holding a sign outside Parliament House demanding action on climate change.
While many Australians still believe our police, ASIO, and federal agencies exist to keep us safe, a growing number are asking: who are they really protecting? Are they defenders of the public interest, or enforcers for political and economic elites?
The Problem: Two Faces of Power
The Public Mandate
Officially, Australia’s security agencies exist to protect the nation:
• ASIO (Australian Security Intelligence Organisation) monitors threats to national security
• AFP (Australian Federal Police) investigates crimes against Commonwealth law
• State police maintain law and order in our communities
Their responsibilities are enshrined in legislation, ranging from responding to terrorism to disrupting organised crime.
How Security Agencies Shield Power: The Hidden Reality
In practice, Australia’s security agencies often function as guardians of the status quo. That means:
• Monitoring and intimidating activists
• Raiding journalists and whistleblowers
• Failing to prosecute systemic corruption by powerful interests
While citizens protesting injustice are watched, fossil fuel companies polluting the planet walk away with subsidies and silence.
Real Story: The ABC Raids
In 2019, the AFP raided the ABC’s Sydney headquarters. The reason? Investigative reporting on alleged war crimes by Australian forces in Afghanistan.
ABC journalist Dan Oakes said:
“We were treated like criminals for doing our job. It was about intimidating the press and setting a warning for future stories.”
When Security Turns Against the People
Targeting Whistleblowers
• Witness K and Bernard Collaery were prosecuted for exposing the Australian government’s spying on East Timor during sensitive oil negotiations.
• Rather than pursue justice for the wrongdoing, the state used ASIO to prosecute those who revealed it.
Harassing Peaceful Protestors
In Queensland, climate protestors were unveiled, detained, and fined under expanded police powers.
Protestors claimed they weren’t violent. They were singing songs and holding placards. But the police treated them like threats to national security when they were arrested outside a Santos gas facility.
These crackdowns are not isolated.
• Environmental activists are now being jailed for blocking roads
• Indigenous land defenders face excessive force
• Protest legislation is tightening in multiple states
Unequal Treatment
• Royal Commissions have exposed banking scandals, Robodebt cruelty, and political misuse of funds
• Yet none of these resulted in dawn raids or high-profile arrests like those faced by protestors and journalists
This creates a two-tiered justice system: one for the powerful and one for everyone else.
Military Powers Over Civilians
While Australia has not yet deployed its military against its own citizens, legislative changes since the Howard era have paved the way for such action.
In 2000, the Defence Legislation Amendment (Aid to Civilian Authorities) Act was passed, expanding the role of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) in domestic situations.
These powers allow the federal government, in coordination with security agencies, to deploy troops within Australia during what it deems a domestic crisis. Critics argue this risks undermining democracy and blurring the line between civil policing and military enforcement.
“The military is trained for combat, not crowd control. Using them in civilian situations sets a dangerous precedent,” warned a legal expert during Senate hearings in 2006.
Although rarely used, the laws remain in place and could be activated by any future government, including in response to public dissent.
Reclaiming Public Power Over Public Agencies
Reimagine the Role of Security
Security agencies should serve democracy, not suppress it. That means:
• Independent oversight bodies with teeth, not tokenism
• Full whistleblower protection laws to safeguard those who speak truth to power
• Legislation limiting the political use of ASIO, AFP, and state police
Reform Case Studies
• Norway: Strong independent oversight of security services
• Germany: Legal safeguards against surveillance of activists
• New Zealand: Media protections enshrined in law
Australia can follow suit – if we demand it.
Reforming Australia’s security agencies is essential if we are to rebuild trust, transparency, and accountability in our democracy.
Leverage Australia’s Dollar Sovereignty
Australia issues its own currency. That means cost is never a barrier to reforming institutions, funding oversight, or compensating victims of misuse.
The question is not “Can we afford it?” but “Do we have the political will to put people before power?”
Time to Ask the Hard Questions
For too long, Australia’s security agencies have operated under the illusion of neutrality. But facts reveal a pattern:
• Activists monitored, journalists raided, and whistleblowers prosecuted
• Corporate crimes and political corruption go largely unpunished
If we want a just society, we must realign our security agencies to their true purpose: protecting the people, not entrenching power.
Q&A: Your Questions Answered
Australians have growing concerns about how our security agencies operate and what powers they possess. Here are a few key answers:
Q1: What is ASIO actually allowed to do?
ASIO is authorised to conduct surveillance, gather intelligence, and use covert operations under national security laws. While it cannot arrest or charge individuals like the police, it can recommend action to law enforcement. Notably, ASIO operates as an intelligence agency, rather than a law enforcement body, meaning its primary role is to inform government decisions, rather than directly enforcing laws. Its activities are often secretive and subject to limited public oversight.
Q2: Is it legal to protest in Australia?
Yes, but new state laws (especially in NSW and QLD) have restricted protest rights, with harsh penalties for blocking roads or disrupting business operations.
Q3: Can these agencies be reformed?
Yes. Countries like Norway and New Zealand show it’s possible to maintain national security while respecting civil rights. Reforms in Australia are overdue.
Call to Action
Curious what others think? Please read what our readers are saying on our Reader Testimonials page.
If you found this article insightful, you can explore more on political reform and Australia’s monetary sovereignty at Social Justice Australia.
Share this article with your community to help drive the conversation toward a more just and equal society.
Click on our Reader Feedback page. Please let us know how our content has inspired you. Submit your testimonial and help shape the conversation today!
Additionally, leave a comment about this article below.
Support Social Justice Australia – Help Keep The Platform Running
Social Justice Australia is committed to delivering independent, in-depth analysis of critical issues affecting Australians. Unlike corporate-backed media, we rely on our readers to sustain this platform.
If you find value in our content, consider making a small donation to help cover the costs of hosting, maintenance, and continued research. No matter how small, every contribution makes a real difference in keeping this site accessible and ad-free.
💡 Your support helps:
• ✅ Keep this website running without corporate influence
• ✅ Fund research and publishing of articles that challenge the status quo
• ✅ Expand awareness of policies that affect everyday Australians
💰 A one-time or monthly donation ensures Social Justice Australia stays a strong, independent voice.
Thank you for being part of this movement for truth and justice.
If you value our work, please take a moment to leave a quick Google Review here and help others discover us.
This article was originally published on Social Justice Australia
Dear reader, we need your support
Independent sites such as The AIMN provide a platform for public interest journalists. From its humble beginning in January 2013, The AIMN has grown into one of the most trusted and popular independent media organisations.
One of the reasons we have succeeded has been due to the support we receive from our readers through their financial contributions.
With increasing costs to maintain The AIMN, we need this continued support.
Your donation – large or small – to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
The security services act to protect the global financial system.
Steve,
And whatever party that is in power as well.
Exactly GL, exactly.
But even more so if the government is of the Right.
Security agencies attract Right-leaning types.
And, in the face of the lack of truly ‘independent oversight bodies with teeth’, the police & security agencies are trained up with US-style brutal methods and civil cynicism indoctrinated from their political masters down through the ranks. Such systems foster a culture of control by bulling ‘rogues within the ranks’ and actions in the field outwith the law.
A recent example being a brutal attack by police on former Greens candidate Hannah Thomas (who is likely to lose an eye from the attack) after she defied a ‘move on order’ whilst peacefully picketing a business that supplied goods & services to Israel’s genocide against the Palestinians. Quite an irony – brutality abounding despite International Law.
And all this with a federal LABOR government and (mostly) Labor state governments.