Some urgent tactical issues have come up, about which I would like to
seek urgent input.
Bearing in mind that this is a public list, which the AEC at least can
reasonably be
expected to subscribe to, please understand that I will not attempt to
outline
all relevant considerations and consider whether any thoughts you have
are more
appropriate as public responses for discussion here or as (not very)
"private"
email to me. (As always, I rarely respond to private email and generally
prefer
public discussions).
Issue 1.
a) Do we want a quick final resolution of all legal issues in the High
Court of Australia so that, assuming they behave in their customary
clueless manner, there will be
no "legal channels" open and the necessity for a direct confrontation
between Australian
democracy and the executive, legislative and judicial branches of
government is clear?
b) Or do we want a protracted legal battle running in parallel with a
build up of political campaigns (e.g. the Republic referendum in about 1
year) so that there is an opportunity for civil liberties lawyers to get
involved and thus help mobilize opinion among the "chattering classes"?
This issue is urgent because a reserved judgment on an application for
an urgent hearing of an appeal against the decision in the URL of the
subject line above is expected any day now.
Assuming customary cluelessness this will result in a decision that
there is no need for an urgent hearing. Any further appeal against that
would have to be filed quickly.
Issue 2.
a) Do we want quick international pressure brought to bear on the
Australian government
(allegedly conceivable though in my view unlikely anyway)?
b) Or do we want a slow build up, e.g. in connection with a signature
campaign for thousands of communications to the International Human
Rights Committee (an extremely overworked and understaffed organization
whose decision, if any, could not be expected for at least
a year) - but whose recommendation could be EXTREMELY embarassing to the
Australian government
although having no direct legal effect.
This issue is less urgent, and less a matter of choice in any sense
within our control,
but involves considerations related to those for issue 1.
Both of these issues concern only the denial of free elections by
requiring voters to vote in favor of candidates they reject. PR, if a
legal issue at all, is unlikely to be treated as
urgent or to have international ramifications (though it may have be
raised at the same time).
Timing was very important in the 1996 campaign. Because the High Court
did not hear the writs filed during the 1993 elections until just before
the 1996 elections there was an awareness of aspects of the issue among
the legal profession and a general assumption that they would declare
s329A invalid. They timed their judgments perfectly for release after
Parliament had been dissolved and during the election campaign. This
resulted in lots of lawyers actually reading what they had to say when I
was imprisoned, which resulted in editorial writers who asked lawyers
what they made of it all, being advised that none of it made any sense
whatever.
I cannot envisage any circumstances arising in which anything like that
could possibly happen again, (but I have consistently underestimated the
stupidity of our opponents).
Experience shows that it is very difficult for most lawyers (and indeed
others) to grasp
the central point that voters are being coerced to vote in favor of
candidates they want to vote against. Like it or not we are going to
have to patiently explain this and convince people of it before the
penny drops that Australia does not have free elections.
Aside from this it is clear that there will be a substantial delay
before we can actually build up steam. I am not clear whether the legal
mobilization will be useful in helping to build up steam, in which case
we would want it to be protracted. Or whether we are better off if the
judiciary has already clearly taken sides with the Parliament and the
Executive against the fundamental constitutional common law acquiesced
in by the Australian people and can build up steam quicker in that
situation.
PS My responses to messages in this list may be delayed as a result of
current preoccupation
with legal side.
