Key facts
- Transparency campaigner Rex Patrick is involved in a legal battle over documents detailing nuclear waste storage locations.
- The Department of Industry, Science and Resources has appealed a freedom of information decision in the Federal Court.
- Patrick could face legal costs of $150,000 or more if the government's appeal is successful.
- A coalition of 18 lawmakers from independent and minor parties has urged the Attorney-General to intervene.
- Civil society organizations have also warned of a chilling effect on public access to information.
An unusual coalition of federal lawmakers has united to support transparency campaigner Rex Patrick in his legal battle against the government over access to documents concerning nuclear waste storage for the Aukus submarine fleet.
Patrick, a former senator, initially won an administrative appeal to access the information under freedom of information laws. However, the acting secretary of the Department of Industry, Science and Resources, Julia Pickworth, has escalated the case to the federal court, seeking to overturn the decision. The department also wants Patrick to cover the government's legal costs, which could exceed $150,000 if he is unsuccessful.
Patrick has written to Attorney-General Michelle Rowland, arguing that the department's actions violate the government's model litigant rules, which mandate fair conduct in legal proceedings. He contends that the threat of substantial costs is an attack on the public interest and Australia's freedom of information regime, designed to deter citizens from seeking information.
This legal challenge has prompted an unlikely alliance across the political spectrum, with 18 independent and minor party members of parliament signing a letter to Rowland urging her intervention. Signatories include teal MPs Allegra Spender and Monique Ryan, independents Ralph Babet and Lidia Thorpe, and Greens senator David Shoebridge. They stated that the government's actions are an "attack on our freedom of information regime, with the intent of deterring Australians from pursuing access to information."
A group of civil society organizations, including the Human Rights Law Centre, Transparency International Australia, and the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance, have also called for Rowland's intervention. They warned that the government's willingness to appeal decisions from information commissioners or review tribunals creates a "chilling effect," discouraging ordinary citizens from challenging agency decisions due to the risk of significant financial exposure.
Patrick criticized the move as a "backdoor way to undermine Australia’s already broken FOI system" and accused the government of prioritizing secrecy over accountability, despite Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's election promise of a new era of transparency. A spokesperson for the Attorney-General declined to comment on the ongoing case.