Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBrown, A Jen_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-04T22:40:58Z
dc.date.available2017-04-04T22:40:58Z
dc.date.issued2011en_US
dc.date.modified2012-09-06T22:27:21Z
dc.identifier.issn18352340en_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://www.commarts.uws.edu.au/gmjau/v5_2011_1/brown_RA.htmlen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/42178
dc.description.abstractEven in midsummer, the historic Ellingham Hall, Norfolk, is a grey place. For Australians used to brighter sunshine year round, it would retain that slight English dinginess even if its most famous resident was not under house arrest. Yet, among the legal problems facing the Australian citizen Julian Assange, the most important challenges are not especially well known. Assange founded WikiLeaks in 2006 as a website dedicated to the secure receipt and anonymous publication of inside information too sensitive or risky for information-holders to release any other way. The bulk if not the entirety of disclosures of public importance since that time were not authorised by the institutions concerned. In other words, as intended, they constitute 'leaks.' Questions of when unauthorised disclosure of information is warranted, and by whom and how such judgments are to be made, are not new in democracies that have long wrestled with the public interest value of whistleblowing.2 However, the entry of new media into this territory, spearheaded by WikiLeaks, has brought public whistleblowing to the forefront of international debate as never before. This article reviews key political responses to WikiLeaks, internationally but especially in Assange's home state of Australia, for their lessons for current and future directions in law reform with respect to public whistleblowing.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.description.publicationstatusYesen_US
dc.format.extent180455 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherUniversity of Western Sydneyen_US
dc.publisher.placeAustraliaen_US
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationNen_US
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom1en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpageto12en_US
dc.relation.ispartofissue1en_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalGlobal Media Journal Australian Editionen_US
dc.relation.ispartofvolume5en_US
dc.rights.retentionYen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchConstitutional Lawen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode180108en_US
dc.titleWeeding out WikiLeaks (and why it won't work): legislative recognition of public whistleblowing in Australiaen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Peer Reviewed (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articlesen_US
gro.rights.copyrightCopyright remains with the author 2011. The attached file is reproduced here in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. For information about this journal please refer to the journal’s website or contact the author.en_US
gro.date.issued2011
gro.hasfulltextFull Text


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record