A Sydney businessman accused of selling secrets to China has claimed from prison that the case against him is a false police narrative based on no evidence and the prosecution “will fail”, embarrassing Australia.
In his first public words written from prison, where he has been remanded for more than six months before an expected trial, Alexander Csergo claimed that despite months of investigation prosecutors had found “no evidence of espionage, or classified or confidential information” being handed over.
Csergo, 55, was arrested at his Bondi home in April and charged with one count of reckless foreign interference over reports that he wrote in 2021 and 2022 for two Chinese nationals who approached him through social media, purporting to be from a thinktank. They gave the anglicised names “Ken” and “Evelyn”. Csergo denies the allegations.
The advertising and technology executive provided reports to his two Chinese handlers on a variety of subjects – including lithium mining, German politics and Australia’s military alliance to the US – and was paid about RMB20,000 (A$4,300) for each.
Stuck in Shanghai during the height of Covid lockdowns, Csergo told Australian police that he had held concerns, but could not be certain, that he was being groomed by intelligence officers from China’s powerful ministry of state security. He said he had filled his reports with anodyne, open-source information – and in some cases incredible information, such as a fabricated interview with a former Australian prime minister – to placate his handlers until he could escape China.
As evidence of the approach, Csergo brought home to Australia a list – literally titled “shopping list” – of information sought by Ken and Evelyn, including information on the Five Eyes intelligence alliance and whether Australia’s new Aukus alliance was “preparing for [a] Taiwan war”.
Csergo had been living in Sydney for more than a month when he was arrested. He had kept the list at home as evidence but said he had provided none of the information sought, and told police he had never intended to.
Writing from Parklea prison, Csergo said elements of the police statement of facts put before the court were misrepresentations of his interview, and presented so as to make his interactions appear more clandestine and nefarious.
The police statement of facts states Csergo “believed from the outset that Ken and Evelyn were working for the Ministry of State Security and their communications with him were an intelligence-gathering process”.
Csergo, writing from prison, said he had not told police that in his interview and that he had been unsure of who Ken and Evelyn were or who they represented.
He wrote that he had stated he “took precautions to determine the legitimacy of the approach and to ensure that no information that was confidential or classified was provided”.
“This ensured I did not break any laws relating to national security – however it did come at a cost, since the narratives were critical of the Chinese state,” he said. “Had it been found out that I was the author, while in China, I would be detained.
“I lived with that fear – especially prior to my departure in February. What is ironic is that it wasn’t the Chinese government that detained me – but my own – I have to question their motives given the evidence and the facts.”
The police statement of facts also refers to multiple meetings held in secret: “On occasion he met Ken and Evelyn at cafes or restaurants that were completely empty.”
“The covert meetings never took place,” Csergo wrote.
“All meetings took place in busy, well-known locations in Shanghai. It seems that a single meeting in a private dining room … during a period of Covid lockdowns of business, has been dramatised by the AFP officers with the desired effect.”
‘Fallout will cost Australia’s reputation,’ Csergo says
Csergo said the case against him was a weak and accused the police of constructing a false narrative, and claimed that he had been denied access to his legal team and to the brief of evidence against him, hampering his ability to prepare his defence.
“They will try desperately to prove the documents delivered some ‘influence’ – however this will fail. And in return the fallout will cost Australia’s reputation internationally, it will hurt the relationship with China, and will influence Australians’ trust in the government.”
He said he had spent much of his time in prison in a “solitary-like prison environment”, having been “branded by the AFP as a ‘spy for China’ selling secrets”, which brought notoriety and potential danger in jail.
Upon Csergo’s arrest, the AFP said it believed Ken and Evelyn worked “for a foreign intelligence agency” and were “undertaking intelligence collection activities”.
“Espionage and foreign interference pose a serious threat to Australia’s sovereignty, security and integrity of our national institutions,” the AFP said.
In refusing bail last month, the magistrate Susan Horan said the case against Csergo “cannot be described as weak”.
Horan said the most significant risk was that Csergo would not return to court, despite a $300,000 surety offered by himself and family members.
The charge against Csergo – one count of reckless foreign interference – has not yet been certified by the commonwealth director of public prosecutions. When a six-month deadline to do so passed in October without certification, and without a full brief of evidence provided to Csergo, prosecutors were given additional time.
Csergo’s case returns to court Wednesday.
