Chinese woman becomes third person charged under Australia's foreign interference laws
The woman, an Australian permanent resident based in the capital Canberra, is only the third person charged since the laws were passed in 2018 and the first to be accused of interferring with the general population, Australian Federal Police Assistant Commissioner Stephen Nutt police said.
She was charged in a Canberra court with covertly gathering information about a local branch of the Buddhist association Guan Yin Citta on behalf of the Public Security Bureau of China.
The association is banned in China. Police have not detailed her alleged objectives.
'We allege the activity was to support intelligence objectives of the China's Public Security Bureau. This is the first time the AFP has charged a person with foreign interference that allegedly involves targeting members of the Australian community,' Nutt told reporters.
'Foreign interference is a serious crime that undermines democracy and social cohesion. It is a crime carried out by or on behalf of a foreign principal that involves covert and deceptive conduct or threats of serious harm or menacing demands,' Nutt added.
The woman, who was arrested at her home Saturday, cannot be named publicly due to a court order. She was remanded in custody and faces a maximum 15 years in prison if convicted.
The Chinese Embassy in Canberra did not immediately respond on Monday to a request for comment.
She is the first foreign national to be charged under the sweeping laws that created a rift between Australia and China when they were first announced in 2017.
Vietnam-born Melbourne businessman and local community leader Di Sanh Duong was sentenced to two years and nine months in prison last year over an attempt to influence a former federal government minister on behalf of China.
Sydney businessman Alexander Csergo also was charged with foreign interference for allegedly accepting payments for information from two suspected Chinese spies. He pleaded not guilty to the charge.
Mike Burgess, director-general of the Australian Security Intelligence Organization, said the nation's main domestic spy agency had made a signficant contribution to the latest arrest.
'Foreign interference of the kind alleged is an appalling assault on Australian values, freedoms and sovereignty,' Burgess said in a statement.
The charge comes as Prime Minister Anthony Albanese mends bilateral relations with China that plumbed new lows under the previous Australian administration over issues including foreign interference laws.
Albanese traveled to Beijing last month to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping for the fouth time since the Australian leader was first elected in 2022.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
34 minutes ago
- Reuters
Trump may look like he's winning the trade war, but hurdles remain
WASHINGTON, Aug 7 (Reuters) - At a glance, U.S. President Donald Trump appears to be winning the trade war he unleashed after returning to the White House in January, bending major trading partners to his will, imposing double-digit tariff rates on nearly all imports, narrowing the trade deficit, and raking in tens of billions of dollars a month in much-needed cash for federal government coffers. Significant hurdles remain, however, including whether U.S. trading partners will make good on investment and goods-purchase commitments, how much tariffs will drive up inflation or stymie demand and growth, and whether the courts allow many of his ad-hoc levies to stand. On inauguration day, the effective U.S. tariff rate was about 2.5%. It has since jumped to somewhere between 17% and 19%, according to a range of estimates. The Atlantic Council estimates it will edge closer to 20%, the highest in a century, with higher duties taking effect on Thursday. Trading partners have largely refrained from retaliatory tariffs, sparing the global economy from a more painful tit-for-tat trade war. Data on Tuesday showed a 16% narrowing of the U.S. trade deficit in June, while the U.S. trade gap with China shrank to its smallest in more than 21 years. American consumers have shown themselves to be more resilient than expected, but some recent data indicate the tariffs are already affecting jobs, growth and inflation. "The question is, what does winning mean?" said Josh Lipsky, who heads economic studies at the Atlantic Council. "He's raising tariffs on the rest of the world and avoiding a retaliatory trade war far easier than even he anticipated, but the bigger question is what effect does that have on the U.S. economy." Michael Strain, head of economic policy studies at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said Trump's geopolitical victories could prove hollow. "In a geopolitical sense, Trump's obviously getting tons of concessions from other countries, but in an economic sense, he's not winning the trade war," he said. "What we're seeing is that he is more willing to inflict economic harm on Americans than other countries are willing to inflict on their nations. And I think of that as losing." Kelly Ann Shaw, a White House trade adviser during Trump's first term who is now a partner at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, said a still-strong economy and near-record-high stock prices "support a more aggressive tariff strategy." But Trump's tariffs, tax cuts, deregulation and policies to boost energy production would take time to play out. "I think history will judge these policies, but he is the first president in my lifetime to make major changes to the global trading system," she added. Trump has concluded eight framework agreements with the European Union, Japan, Britain, South Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia, Pakistan and the Philippines that impose tariffs on their goods ranging from 10% to 20%. That's well short of the "90 deals in 90 days" administration officials had touted in April, but they account for some 40% of U.S. trade flows. Adding in China, currently saddled with a 30% levy on its goods but likely to win another reprieve from even higher tariffs before an August 12 deadline, would raise that to nearly 54%. Deals aside, many of Trump's tariff actions have been mercurial. On Wednesday he ratcheted up pressure on India, doubling new tariffs on goods from there to 50% from 25% because of its imports of oil from Russia. The same rate is in store for goods from Brazil, after Trump complained about its prosecution of former leader Jair Bolsonaro, a Trump ally. And Switzerland, which Trump had previously praised, is facing 39% tariffs after a conversation between its leader and Trump derailed a deal. Ryan Majerus, a trade lawyer who worked in both the first Trump administration and the Biden government, said what's been announced so far fails to address "longstanding, politically entrenched trade issues" that have bothered U.S. policymakers for decades, and getting there would likely take "months, if not years." He also noted they lack specific enforcement mechanisms for the big investments announced, including $550 billion for Japan and $600 billion for the EU. Critics lit into European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen after she agreed to a 15% tariff during a surprise meeting with Trump during his trip to Scotland last month, while gaining little in return. The deal frustrated winemakers and farmers, who had sought a zero-for-zero tariff. Francois-Xavier Huard, head of France's FNIL national dairy sector federation, said 15% was better than the threatened 30%, but would still cost dairy farmers millions of euros. European experts say von der Leyen's move did avert higher tariffs, calmed tensions with Trump, averting potentially higher duties on semiconductors, pharmaceuticals and cars, while making largely symbolic pledges to buy $750 billion of U.S. strategic goods and invest over $600 billion. Meeting those pledges will fall to individual EU members and companies, and cannot be mandated by Brussels, trade experts and analysts note. U.S. officials insist Trump can re-impose higher tariffs if he believes the EU, Japan or others are not honoring their commitments. But it remains unclear how that would be policed. And history offers a caution. China, with its state-run economy, never met its modest purchase agreements under Trump's Phase 1 U.S.-China trade deal. Holding it to account proved difficult for the subsequent Biden administration. "All of it is untested. The EU, Japan and South Korea are going to have to figure out how to operationalize this," Shaw said. "It's not just government purchases. It's getting the private sector motivated to either make investments or back loans, or to purchase certain commodities." And lastly, the main premise for the tariffs Trump has imposed unilaterally faces legal challenges. His legal team met with stiff questioning during appellate court oral arguments over his novel use of the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, historically used for sanctioning enemies or freezing their assets, to justify his tariffs. A ruling could come any time and regardless of the outcome seems destined to be settled ultimately by the Supreme Court.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Lawyer condemns $1.3 million compensation for Australian woman wrongfully imprisoned for 20 years
An Australian state government's decision to pay 2 million Australian dollars ($1.3 million) compensation to a woman who spent 20 years in prison after being wrongfully convicted of killing her four children was condemned by her lawyer Thursday as 'profoundly unjust.' New South Wales Attorney-General Michael Daley said Thursday that Kathleen Folbigg's lawyers had been told the sum the 58-year-old would be paid more than two years after she was released from prison. Daley did not make the figure public, but Folbigg's supporters confirmed the sum. 'The decision follows thorough and extensive consideration of the materials and issues raised in Ms. Folbigg's application (for compensation) and provided by her legal representatives,' Daley said in a statement. The government declined further comment. Folbigg's lawyer, Rhanee Rego, described the sum as a 'profoundly unjust figure' and 'hugely insulting.' 'Her (Folbigg's) reaction is really that it feels, well — we all feel that it's profoundly unjust,' Rego told the Australian Broadcasting Corp. 'When you look at the other comparison cases and take into account what she has endured: she lost her four children; she has spent two decades in jail; vilified as Australia's worst female serial killer,' Rego added. While Folbigg has no legal avenue to appeal Daley's decision, Rego said she supported a lawmaker's call for an inquiry into how Daley reached the figure. Rego didn't put a figure on appropriate compensation, but said it should be 'substantially higher.' 'I was very much hopeful that it would be substantially more because this is one of our worst wrongful conviction cases in Australia,' Rego said. In December 2023, the New South Wales Court of Appeal overturned all convictions against Folbigg, 20 years after a jury found her guilty of killing her four children. Folbigg had already been pardoned at the state government's direction months earlier and released from prison based on new scientific evidence that her four children may have died from natural causes as she had always insisted. The pardon was seen as the quickest way of getting Folbigg out of prison after an inquiry into the new evidence recommended the appeals court consider quashing her convictions. The inquiry that recommended Folbigg's pardon and acquittal was prompted by a petition signed in 2021 by 90 scientists, medical practitioners and related professionals who argued that significant new evidence showed the children likely died of natural causes. Her first child, Caleb, was born in 1989 and died 19 days later in what a jury determined to be the lesser crime of manslaughter. Her second child, Patrick, was 8 months old when he died in 1991. Two years later, Sarah died at 10 months. In 1999, Folbigg's fourth child, Laura, died at 19 months. Prosecutors argued Folbigg smothered them. She was convicted in 2003 and sentenced to 30 years in prison on three counts of murder and one of manslaughter. Folbigg's friend since childhood, Tracy Chapman, described the compensation sum as 'disgraceful.' She said Folbigg was unemployed and living alone with her dog Snowy in rental accommodation in the city of Newcastle. Chapman said Folbigg was 'pretty much rocking in a corner' in reaction to the news and unable to speak to the media. 'Kath's on ongoing mental health support that she needs for the rest of her days,' Chapman said. 'She's got to deal with the trauma of the loss of the four kids that was never done properly during 20 years wrongfully convicted in prison, the legal process and all the trauma that was attached to it as well as then living day to day in a world that has changed so much,' Chapman added. Chapman said Folbigg had told her she was 'deeply sad and there is no empathy here.' 'When I spoke to her she just said: 'Trace, the sad thing here is I'm not surprised,'' Chapman said, using an abbreviated form of Tracy.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Solomon Islands blocks US, China, Taiwan from Pacific's top political meet
SYDNEY, Aug 7 (Reuters) - Solomon Islands Prime Minister Jeremiah Manele has said that 21 donor countries, including the United States and China, will not be invited to the region's top political meeting, a move that follows pressure from Beijing to exclude Taiwan. China's biggest security ally in the Pacific Islands, the Solomon Islands is hosting the annual meeting of the 18-member bloc's forum in September. Three island states have diplomatic ties with Taiwan and not China, and they had expressed concern Taiwanese officials would be blocked from entering the country. Solomon Islands switched ties from Taiwan to China in 2019, and removed Taiwan from a list of countries eligible for concessional entry in April. Beijing, which has deepened its ties in the Pacific, claims Taiwan as its own territory. Manele told the Solomon Islands parliament on Wednesday his cabinet had decided no dialogue partners would be invited to this year's event, because a review of each country's relationship with the Pacific had not been completed. He said he had informed the forum's 18 leaders of the decision this week. The World Bank, Asia Development Bank and civil society groups would attend, he added. Opposition party politician Peter Kenilorea Jr, chairman of the parliament's foreign relations committee, said the decision was "a massive missed opportunity" for Pacific Island countries to meet global donors. "We know this issue is all about China and Taiwan," he told parliament. After forum leaders were told of the decision, Marshall Islands President Hilda Heine criticised interference in the forum's affairs in a speech to the Taiwan ally's parliament. China had "interfered" at last year's meeting in Tonga to change the language of the leaders' communique, Heine said. References to Taiwan were removed after Chinese diplomats complained. The Pacific Islands is among the world's most aid-reliant regions, and on the frontline of rising sea levels. The region has also been a focus of increasing security competition between the United States and China. While U.S. allies Australia and New Zealand are the largest forum members, neither Beijing nor Washington are part of the group. Kenilorea Jr said he feared that China, which has a strong presence in Solomon Islands, will hold bilateral meetings with Pacific leaders on the margins of the forum regardless. "This could be seen by some PIF leaders as a betrayal of the collective and could risk an even bigger rift of the group," he said in comments to Reuters. China's embassy did not respond to a request for comment. The forum's foreign ministers will meet in Fiji next week.
