Skip Nav | Home | Mobile | Editorial Guidelines | Mission Statement | About Us | Contact | Help | Security | Support Us

World

Prime Minister Guilty of Sedition

Wanda Fish | 08.11.2005 12:07 | Analysis | Anti-militarism | Repression | World

Wanda Fish calls on constitutional and civil libertarian lawyers to mount a case against Federal and State Governments for conspiring to overturn basic constitutional rights with the Anti-Terrorism Bill 2005. These proposed laws break internationally recognised treaties on human rights, overturn the fundamental principle of presumption of innocence, and seriously threaten free speech and protest.

Conspiring to overturn basic constitutional rights
Conspiring to overturn basic constitutional rights


AUSTRALIA: Open Submission to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Committee

From an alarmed and alert journalist

Subject: Anti-Terrorism Bill 2005,
(1) Schedule 7, Sedition
(2) Constitutionality and State Legislation

I respectfully request the Senate Committee to consider my submission and include this submission in the Government record, as per my constitutional rights as an Australian citizen.

The duty of the Australian Government to safeguard the freedom and safety of Australian citizens is seriously compromised by this Bill, that has been described publicly as ‘draconian’ by State Premiers, members of the Government's party, legal experts, and journalists such as myself. Overall, the Bill removes basic democratic rights that the Government claims to protect in the ‘war on terror’.

The Anti-Terrorism Bill in its current form directly contravenes several articles in the United National ‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’, ( http://web.amnesty.org/pages/aboutai-udhr-eng) specifically articles 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 18, and 19. Should the Senate pass the Bill in its current form, Australia will be breaking its signed convention to these universally recognised international laws. In summary, the Terror Laws remove the following human rights: the right to be judged under the law as anyone else, the right to proper arrest and charge, the right to a lawyer, the right to a fair and public hearing, the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, the right to privacy, to right to move about freely in our country, the right to express anti-war views without fear of punishment or censure, and the right to mobilise support for protecting these rights.

While I am opposed to all major sections of the Bill that bypasses our judicial system and reverts the important democratic principle of ‘presumption of innocence’, I draw your attention to two specific issues of major concern:
(1) the expansion of sedition offences and
(2) the dubious constitutionality of using State based legislation and emergency services to over-ride important protections in the federal Constitution.

I am a peace activist who has publicly opposed the war and supported the plight of Iraqis who have suffered under the American-led invastion and occupation of their country. According to the proposed laws of sedition, I could be charged with ‘supporting the enemy’, even though Australia never officially declared war on Iraq or Afghanistan, but instead joined the Bush administration in a declaration of war on a subjective noun, terrorism. The impact and potential effect of the sedition laws will be to curtail investigative journalism that exposes the corruption and economic motivation of an ill-defined ‘war’ with invisible ‘enemies’.

I am also an active volunteer with Amnesty International and note that even within the Bill's exception referring to humanitarian work, you still place the evidentiary burden on the defendant. This is a travesty of the basic principle of presuming innocence in a fair democracy, and places undue pressure on all volunteers and workers for humanitarian rights and equality.

The Bill also directly contradicts the Government's report ‘Australia's National Framework for Human Rights: National Action Plan’, published only a few months ago with a foreword by Prime Minister John Howard in which he claimed, ‘Australia has a good human rights record. We enjoy a strong democratic tradition, a transparent and independent judicial system and a free press.’ I submit that the Anti-Terrorism Bill 2005 overturns those rights. I will also be submitting a formal complain to the United Nations, and pointing out that the Australian Government is currently passing legislation that directly contravenes several treaties.

In the course of my research and consultation with legal experts about this Bill, I have read several notable legal opinions that claim the Bill in its current form is unconstitutional. The Prime Minister admitted this when he said publicly following the COAG conference that he required four of the Premiers to support the Bill and agree to pass state legislation so that certain aspects of the Bill could be enforced by State emergency services. The Prime Minister of Australia has a duty to uphold and safeguard the Australian constitution.

I submit that the Prime Minister, the Government Ministry, the Opposition Leader, and the State Premiers who support the laws are by their actions in supporting this Bill conspiring to overthrow the Constitution of the Commonwalth of Australia, and should therefore be charged with sedition under the new laws.

As a concerned citizen who respects and obeys the Consitutional laws and our judiciary system, I pledge to protect and uphold my democratic rights. I therefore in good conscience will not honor or obey laws that I believe overturn basic democratic rights, agreed international human rights, and the freedom to speak out and mobilise action against a Government that is conspiring to remove those rights.

Thank you for the opportunity to make this submission, and be assured that I am not alone in these views or in my determination to uphold democracy.

Wanda Fish

Reference:

Anti-Terrorism Bill 2005, Schedule 7, Sedition,
Urging a person to assist those engaged in armed hostilities 15
(8) A person commits an offence if (a) the person urges another person to engage in conduct; and 1
(b) the first-mentioned person intends the conduct to assist, by any means whatever, an organisation or country; and (c) the organisation or country is engaged in armed hostilities 20
against the Australian Defence Force.
Penalty: Imprisonment for 7 years.
Defence
(9) Subsections (7) and (8) do not apply to engagement in conduct by way of, or for the purposes of, the provision of aid of a humanitarian nature.
Note 1: A defendant bears an evidential burden in relation to the matter in 27 subsection (9).



Wanda Fish
- Homepage: http://www.eftel.com/~cleverfish

Comments

Display the following 2 comments

  1. Human rights record — Derek Lane
  2. Laws and terrorism — Derek Lane

Publish

Publish your news

Do you need help with publishing?

/regional publish include --> /regional search include -->

World Topics

Afghanistan
Analysis
Animal Liberation
Anti-Nuclear
Anti-militarism
Anti-racism
Bio-technology
Climate Chaos
Culture
Ecology
Education
Energy Crisis
Fracking
Free Spaces
Gender
Globalisation
Health
History
Indymedia
Iraq
Migration
Ocean Defence
Other Press
Palestine
Policing
Public sector cuts
Repression
Social Struggles
Technology
Terror War
Workers' Movements
Zapatista

Kollektives

Birmingham
Cambridge
Liverpool
London
Oxford
Sheffield
South Coast
Wales
World

Other UK IMCs
Bristol/South West
London
Northern Indymedia
Scotland

Server Appeal Radio Page Video Page Indymedia Cinema Offline Newsheet

secure Encrypted Page

You are viewing this page using an encrypted connection. If you bookmark this page or send its address in an email you might want to use the un-encrypted address of this page.

If you recieved a warning about an untrusted root certificate please install the CAcert root certificate, for more information see the security page.

IMCs


www.indymedia.org

Projects
print
radio
satellite tv
video

Africa

Europe
antwerpen
armenia
athens
austria
barcelona
belarus
belgium
belgrade
brussels
bulgaria
calabria
croatia
cyprus
emilia-romagna
estrecho / madiaq
galiza
germany
grenoble
hungary
ireland
istanbul
italy
la plana
liege
liguria
lille
linksunten
lombardia
madrid
malta
marseille
nantes
napoli
netherlands
northern england
nottingham imc
paris/île-de-france
patras
piemonte
poland
portugal
roma
romania
russia
sardegna
scotland
sverige
switzerland
torun
toscana
ukraine
united kingdom
valencia

Latin America
argentina
bolivia
chiapas
chile
chile sur
cmi brasil
cmi sucre
colombia
ecuador
mexico
peru
puerto rico
qollasuyu
rosario
santiago
tijuana
uruguay
valparaiso
venezuela

Oceania
aotearoa
brisbane
burma
darwin
jakarta
manila
melbourne
perth
qc
sydney

South Asia
india


United States
arizona
arkansas
asheville
atlanta
Austin
binghamton
boston
buffalo
chicago
cleveland
colorado
columbus
dc
hawaii
houston
hudson mohawk
kansas city
la
madison
maine
miami
michigan
milwaukee
minneapolis/st. paul
new hampshire
new jersey
new mexico
new orleans
north carolina
north texas
nyc
oklahoma
philadelphia
pittsburgh
portland
richmond
rochester
rogue valley
saint louis
san diego
san francisco
san francisco bay area
santa barbara
santa cruz, ca
sarasota
seattle
tampa bay
united states
urbana-champaign
vermont
western mass
worcester

West Asia
Armenia
Beirut
Israel
Palestine

Topics
biotech

Process
fbi/legal updates
mailing lists
process & imc docs
tech