Researchers in Australia are concerned that the stringent “export controls” law set to come into effect in April may restrict their academic research freedom.
Concerns over Restrictions on Applied Research
The law, known as the Defence Trade Controls Act, will require academics working on applied research classified as “dual use” – which may have military and non-military applications – to apply to the Australian Department of Defence before they can communicate with colleagues overseas about their work. The dual use list includes areas from electronics to microbiological research. By April 2, which marks the end of a one-year grace period since the law was enacted, affected academics face jail time or fines if they communicate their research outside Australia without a permit.
Potential Impacts on Research
Researchers working in fields such as encryption, artificial intelligence, and microbiology have expressed concerns about the impacts of this law. John Eirdale, a microbiologist at the University of Sydney, says, “I think we’re all worried because it seems like a very blunt tool, and there’s the possibility of clumsily applying it with serious ramifications for researchers.”
Lack of Clarity in the Legislation
Scientists in the field of encryption have become known for their concerns, partly due to the historically tense relationship between their field and defense and national security agencies. In July 2015, Tij signed one of 229 Australian and international signatures on an online petition from the International Association for Cryptologic Research, claiming the law would isolate Australia from the international community of cryptologic research by imposing “vague and potentially dangerous export controls.”
Inappropriate Application
Bill Moran, a radar researcher at RMIT University in Melbourne, said he was shocked to discover that his two current research projects were classified as “prohibited” by an online Department of Defence survey designed to give researchers a quick “yes” or “no” answer about whether their research fell under the law. He was later told that the research in question did not require a permit at all. Moran says, “I’ve done classified work before and I understand that there are some things that need to be classified.” However, he states that the new legislation is being improperly applied to non-military academic work.
Amendments to the Law
Liz Field, the science policy secretary at the Australian Academy of Science in Canberra, says the law has already been amended from its 2012 version (which was never implemented), making it more workable for researchers. The amendments introduced in April 2015 indicate that affected researchers will not need permits for oral communications (such as speaking on the phone or discussing research at external conferences) or for sending data or drafts to external journals prior to publication, according to Field, who was involved in negotiations led by former Chief Scientist Ian Chubb.
Effects of the Law on Research
Despite the amendments, Tij says she remains concerned about the vague but strong threat posed by the law. She states, “On one hand, these are very severe penalties – at least in theory – and on the other hand, the activities we’re talking about involve sharing new encryption ideas with researchers abroad.” She adds, “It’s hard to see controversial prosecutions, but it is possible to see an unsettling impact on research.”
Source: https://www.nature.com/news/australian-cryptologists-concerned-by-restrictive-exports-law-1.19611
Leave a Reply