Indonesia, spying and whistle-blowers.

There is a level of poetic justice in the uproar that the exposure of “spying” and international phone tapping and hacking has created.

Consider the irony in the criminal proceedings against the former editors of the now defunct News of The World newspaper. They are being tried for illegal phone hacking. We now know that the governments of America, the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia were (are) involved in exactly the same manner of “illegal” phone hacking!

It is a tenet of our Laws, that - “Justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done”. This can only happen in an open society. This can only happen in a society that is not always kept in a of state ignorance about matters that affect them on a daily basis; that affects their individual rights (see the UN Charter of Human Rights); that affects their personal wealth; that affects their health.

In the latest revelations it is alleged that the Australian’s hacked the mobile phone of the wife of the Indonesian President. How could listening in to her phone calls possibly make Australia a safer place? How could listening to her phone calls possible affect Australia’s, or for that matter the World’s security?

No wonder the Indonesians are upset – just as I am positive we would be upset if it was reported in the press that the phone of Abbot’s wife had been tapped by the Indonesians!

Whistle-blowers, by definition, shine a light on the darker corners of the way the world is controlled – be it in industry, commerce, the law or by governments. And this is a good thing.

If any society is kept in a state of even partial ignorance – by subterfuge or deliberate misinformation then rumour and uninformed opinion will take hold and create divisions within any community or society. This should not be how a democratic country is governed – particularly in Australia where voting is compulsory and we are fined for NOT voting!

I will be the first to admit that there is some need for commercial or industrial processes or inventions to be kept from competitors – this is normal business practice – as long as there is no hint of corruption, malpractice or fraudulent behaviour. Similarly there is need for the legal fraternity to maintain a high level of confidentiality regarding their clients; the same applies to the medical profession – as long as there is no hint of corruption, malpractice or fraudulent behaviour. 

With governments however I am not so sure. When matters concerning the armed forces and with some areas of policing are involved I agree that there should be a high level of secrecy – as long as there is no hint of corruption, malpractice or fraudulent behaviour. But when it comes to other government offices such as trade, or immigration, or border protection and customs I can see no reason at all for any level of secrecy.

If we, the public – voters, purchasers and consumers – were always kept unaware of dishonest practices, of corruption, conflicts of interest, nepotism, of malpractice and fraudulent behaviour, how could we ever make informed opinions and judgements about who to vote for, the value of our portfolio of investments or whether the people we deal with are honest or trustworthy and whether justice is being truly applied?

The short answer is that we couldn’t. 

This is why we need whistle blowers. They tell us what has happened or is happening behind the veil of secrecy that has been drawn to avoid any scrutiny by the public - however “embarrassing” such disclosures maybe for the government(s) involved.