I hope they don't, the whole point of the ban is to ensure an untainted jury. The details will be released once the case has been heard.
5. The purpose of these orders is to prevent damage to Australia's international relations that may be caused by the publication of material that may damage the reputations of specified individuals who are not the subject of charges in these proceedings.
(Off-the-cuff speculation: an Australian may be charged with either taking bribes from, or offering bribes to, someone high-up in another government. In which case, Australia wants to prosecute the Australian in question, but doesn't want to call out the important foreign official on the other side of the transaction.)
Not at all.
It's done to "protect Australia's international reputation":
The purpose of these orders is to prevent damage to Australia's international relations that may be caused by the publication of material that may damage the reputations of specific individuals who are not the subject of charges in these proceedings
The order doesn't even mention jury selection.
My only hope is that I could keep my goddamn mouth shut long enough to actually get on one.
I was hoping for an experience like '12 Angry Men'. Maybe next time.
> The super-injunction invokes “national security” grounds to prevent reporting about the case, by anyone, in order to “prevent damage to Australia's international relations”
Really makes you wonder what else is being hidden behind the Abbott government curtain? This definitely won't help LNP's already diminishing support and further plunge Tony Abbott's dismal approval rating down even further (if that is even possible).