As such, surgical amendments to federal Attorney-General Michelle Rowland's reforms will be needed if they are to pass the Senate and become law.
Australia has hundreds of secrecy provisions attached to individual laws, which aim to protect a range of information held by public institutions, from the most classified state secrets to commercially sensitive contracts or personal health details.
However, they create a fundamental tension the public's right to know and criminalising would-be whistleblowers from disclosing wrongdoing.
The Alliance for Journalists' Freedom says Australia has over-securitised its laws, creating more than 130 new security laws in the two decades after September 11, 2001, alone.
Appearing before a Senate committee on Wednesday, alliance executive director Peter Greste said that was more than any other country, giving Australia an unwanted world title.
"A degree of secrecy is important, of course, but only around information that is genuinely sensitive or that would be genuinely damaging if it was released," he said.
"We caution against knee-jerk legislation in response to terrorist incidents that often intrudes on rights and freedoms.
"Those laws have often damaged the principles of the system that parliament was trying to protect."
The complex reform package seeks to roll back about 300 lower-level secrecy provisions by either repealing them or removing criminal penalties, while also creating a new catch-all secrecy offence.
It also establishes a test of improper intent - to assess whether the person disclosing information sought personal benefit or to cause harm - to ensure that whistleblowers and journalists can publish information in the public interest.
The Greens want public interest journalism protected but are concerned the new "mega offence" would have the unintended consequence of looping in contractors and volunteers that engaged with the government.
"You've got this devil's bargain of getting a one-size-fits-all secrecy offence that just goes not just across the public sector sector but across anyone who engages with the public sector," senator David Shoebridge said.
The Right To Know alliance of media organisations and the Human Rights Law Centre have also voiced alarm over this provision.
The coalition have also raised several concerns, including whether the "intent" tests would give rise to ideologically based disclosures going unpunished.
The opposition also query a provision handing the attorney-general the power to veto the prosecution of journalists accused of breaching secrecy laws.
Senator Michaelia Cash said that gave rise to "potential politicisation" where journalists might need to "curry favour with a particular attorney-general of the day".
Shadow attorney-general Julian Leeser said the "consent requirement will apply to every commonwealth secrecy offence that does not already require ministerial consent" and constituted "an extraordinary reach".
Both the coalition and Greens say they will finalise their positions on the laws following the Senate hearings and report.
11°C