The plea was entered in ACT Magistrates Court on Monday, when the woman appeared while remanded in custody.
Police allege the Australian permanent resident covertly collected information about a Canberra Buddhist association for China.
The charge carries a maximum of 15 years' imprisonment.
The woman faced the court wearing a black puffer jacket as she was escorted by corrections officers and accompanied by a Mandarin translator.
Her lawyer Anthony Williamson SC argued the public interest would still be served with media able to report on the facts of the case and evidence presented in open court.
But naming the woman would affect a fair trial because of information in the public domain, he argued.
"This is a matter which I don't think anyone will disagree with, that has already in its short lifespan attracted very intense media interest," Mr Williamson told the court.
"If the defendant were to be named, there his a very real risk that information currently in the public domain, which the average prospective juror would not be able to link with the defendant, will be so linked."
Mr Williamson called comments from senior bureaucrats about espionage and foreign interference after the arrest "unhelpful, to say the least", warning they had the propensity to "whip up an atmosphere of fear and hysteria".
Chief Magistrate Lorraine Walker ruled a suppression order on the woman's name was needed to avoid prejudicing a future jury trial, especially with significant public interest in the case.
It was a matter that could attract "even a level of apprehension" to a potential juror, she told the court while making her ruling.
"I perceive a very real likelihood of prejudice."
Information available online could affect the defendant's credibility and this was different from typical court cases as this was "of a type that is likely to stir emotion among jurors", the chief magistrate said.
Open justice had to be balanced against the public interest of ensuring a fair trial, she said.
"That is an impost on the principle of open justice but it is a limited impost."
The Australian Federal Police were successful in suppressing the names of officers it argued needed to remain anonymous to effectively carry out their investigations and who could become at risk of foreign interference or espionage.
The matter will come back before the court on November 10.
13°C