Australian ministers won't comment on media reports that Indian spies were secretly expelled

MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) — A senior Australian government minister said Wednesday the bilateral relationship with India was good and had improved in recent years, but declined to comment on reports that two Indian spies were secretly expelled from Australia four years ago.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers was asked during a television interview whether India could be considered Australia’s friend after Australian news media and The Washington Post reported the two intelligence operatives’ quiet expulsion.

Chalmers told Australian Broadcasting Corp., “I don’t want to get into those kinds of operational issues in any way.”

“We’ve got a good relationship with India and with other countries in the region, it’s an important economic relationship, it’s become closer in recent years as a consequence of efforts on both sides, and that’s a good thing,” Chalmers said.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Foreign Minister Penny Wong deflected questions Wednesday at press conferences about India’s reported spying, using the government's standard line that they did not comment on intelligence matters.

India is an increasingly important trading partner of Australia, which is trying to reduce its economic reliance on China.

India and Australia are also developing closer military ties as members of the Quad security dialogue that also includes the United States and Japan.

The center-left Labor Party government was not in power when the Australian Security Intelligence Organization, the nation’s main domestic spy agency, removed the two spies.

ASIO Director-General Mike Burgess outlined the activities of what he described as a “nest of spies” during a public speech in 2021. But he did not reveal the nation behind the espionage.

Most observers suspected China or Russia.

The Washington Post, The Sydney Morning Herald and Australian Broadcasting Corp have all cited anonymous security officials identifying the spies as operatives of India’s foreign intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing.

The spies targeted relationships with current and former politicians and a state police force, Burgess said. They also monitored the country’s diaspora in Australia and obtained classified information about Australia’s trade relationships.

They asked a public servant to provide information on security protocols at a major Australian airport and recruited an official with a security clearance to access sensitive details about defense technology, Burgess said.

Burgess and ASIO have declined to say whether India was behind the spying.

The Indian High Commission in Australia did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday.

Australia's Treasurer Jim Chalmers addresses the Lowy Institute in Sydney, Wednesday, May 1, 2024. Chalmers says the bilateral relationship with India is good and has improved in recent years, but declined to comment on reports that two Indian spies had been expelled from Australia four years ago. (Dean Lewins/AAP Image via AP)

LONDON (AP) — Britain's High Court ruled Tuesday that new regulations that gave U.K. police more powers to intervene in protests are unlawful.

Civil liberties campaign group Liberty brought legal action against the British government over a law passed last year that lowered the threshold for what is considered “serious disruption” to community life caused by a protest.

The 2023 Public Order Act broadened the definition of “serious disruption” from “significant” and “prolonged” disturbance to individuals or an organization to “more than minor."

Authorities introduced the changes by a process called statutory instrument, which faces less scrutiny, after Parliament rejected them earlier. The measures targeted environmental activists who have staged disruptive protests in recent years on busy highways and roads in the U.K. and beyond to raise awareness about the urgency of climate change.

Suella Braverman, the home secretary at the time, told lawmakers last year that the measures would allow ordinary people to drive or get to work on time free from obstruction from a “selfish minority.”

Critics say the change was part of a worrying constriction of the right to protest in Britain.

Two judges ruled Tuesday that the Home Office acted outside of its powers and failed to carry out a fair consultation process.

Judges Nicholas Green and Timothy Kerr said “‘serious’ cannot, in the enabling legislation, mean ‘more than minor.’”

Akiko Hart, Liberty’s director, said the ruling was a “huge victory for democracy."

“These dangerous powers were rejected by Parliament yet still sneaked through the back door with the clear intention of stopping protesters that the government did not personally agree with," Hart said.

The government said it was disappointed with the ruling.

“We’ve said before that the right to protest is fundamental to democracy, but we simply will not tolerate intimidation or serious disruption of the law-abiding majority.," said Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s spokesman, Dave Pares.

“We will consider all options to keep this important power for police, including appealing the judgment if necessary."

FILE- An activist from the group Just Stop Oil is arrested by police officers as they slow the traffic, marching on a road, in London, on Oct. 30, 2023. Britain's High Court ruled Tuesday, May 21, 2024, that new regulations that gave U.K. police more powers to intervene in protests were unlawful. Campaign group Liberty brought legal action against the British government over a law passed last year that lowered the threshold for what is considered “serious disruption” to community life caused by a protest. (AP Photo/Kin Cheung, File)