Long-awaited reform to Australia’s privacy legislation would criminalise so-called doxing with lengthy jail terms on the table, according to a new bill introduced in parliament on Thursday by the attorney general, Mark Dreyfus.
Dreyfus said the new legislation was a response to “a recent, shocking incident of a group who were targeted with doxing on the basis of their religion”.
This was an apparent reference to the publication of members of a WhatsApp group of Jewish creatives earlier this year, some of whom had targeted the employers or publishers of those posting pro-Palestinian or anti-Israel messages on their social media.
Here’s what you need to know about the proposed laws.
What is doxing?
The legislation says an offence has occurred if a person uses a carriage service to make available, publish or otherwise distribute information including the personal data of one or more individuals, and engages in the conduct in a way that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, menacing or harassing towards those individuals.
It said an example of conduct would include “publishing the name, image and telephone number of an individual on a website and encouraging others to repeatedly contact the individual with violent or threatening messages”.
What type of information is included in doxing?
The legislation says the information includes:
Name;
A photograph or image of the person;
Telephone number;
Email address;
Online account;
Residential address;
Work or business address;
Place of education; or
Place of worship
What will be the penalty?
A person found in breach of the law could face up to six years in prison for the basic offence.
This is increased to up to seven years if the person is found to have engaged in conduct in whole or in part because of “the person’s belief that the group is distinguished by race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status, disability, nationality or national or ethnic origin” and the person does so in a way that a reasonable person would regard as being, in all the circumstances, menacing or harassing towards those members.
The example provided in the legislation is publishing the names, images and residential addresses of members of a private online religious discussion group across multiple websites and encouraging others to attend those addresses and block entryways or otherwise harass the members of that group.
Will there be exceptions?
There were no exemptions included in the legislation, including for journalism or similar professions. White Rose Australia, a group of anti-far-right campaigners who routinely investigate neo-Nazi groups in Australia and unmask the members of those groups in their investigations, feared the legislation could be weaponised against their work.
In his speech to parliament on Thursday, however, Dreyfus said the government recognised there were “legitimate” reasons for the publication of personal information.
”The government recognises that there are circumstances in which people legitimately publish and distribute personal data, including individuals’ names, contact details and movements,” he said.
“The new offences will apply only where a reasonable person would consider the conduct to be, in all the circumstances, menacing or harassing, to ensure that legitimate conduct is not inappropriately criminalised.”
Do people have other legal avenues to pursue if their personal information is posted online?
As part of the raft of privacy reforms introduced into parliament on Thursday, the government also introduced a statutory tort for serious invasion of privacy, to allow people who have had their privacy breached to take civil action against the person who they allege breached their privacy.
The penalties must not exceed the greater of either $478,550 or the maximum amount of damages for non-economic loss that may be awarded in defamation proceedings under an Australian law.
Dreyfus said for such action to succeed, a plaintiff would need to demonstrate that the public interest in protecting their privacy outweighed any competing public interest raised by the defence.
Professional journalists and their employers who adhere to standards or a code of practice are exempt from the legislation if the alleged act is in the development of news content. There are also exemptions for enforcement bodies and intelligence agencies.
