By Andrew Masterson
In Franz Kafka's 1925 dystopian classic The Trial, the central character Josef K is arrested, imprisoned, prosecuted and finally executed. At no stage does he discover the nature of the charges levelled against him.
The degree to which the necessary secrecy of state security clashes with the right of the public to know what is being done in its name has forever been a matter of constant adjustment. That tension is arguably the mark of a robust society, but the current haste being urged by the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General in relation to passing the government's proposed metadata retention legislation marks, like Josef K's experience, a descent into the absurd.
Illustration: Cathy Wilcox
Precisely what types of metadata must be retained under the legislation is unknown, even to the majority of the 400 internet service providers in Australia who will be responsible for storing it. The government is consulting with some of the larger players in the industry, but the smaller operators have so far not been included in the conversation.
The passing of the legislation, if it occurs, will do little to solve the mystery. The precise data targets to be retained will not be included in the act, but will be outlined later in a separate schedule – free, thus, of parliamentary scrutiny.
The reason for this, it seems, is national security. The exact data to be retained is a matter of closely held secrecy – because, the logic flows, if it was public knowledge then the bad guys would know how to avoid using it.
Given the long-acknowledged reach of US-based web surveillance – both state-driven and commercially conducted – it's probably a safe assumption that all but the most deluded terrorists have ceased ages ago visiting any obviously incriminating websites. And even low-level net-using scumbags are adept at escaping detection through anonymising services, or virtual private networks – or even the free Wi-Fi at the local cafe.
Questioning the wisdom of the Attorney-General's pet project is not synonymous with supporting terrorism or condoning child pornography. It is reasonable, rational and arguably patriotic to demand detail and to expect a rationale more cogent than an appeal to fear.
One year after his arrest and trial on unrevealed charges, Josef K was taken to a quarry and shot dead by state-employed strangers. It might be wise to remember that.
Andrew Masterson in a contributor.