Submission to Darwin Magistrate’s Court Re: Alleged Trespass at Parliament House.

The members of our groups - NAP (Network Against Prohibition) and PARIAH - (People Against Racism In Aboriginal Homelands) - facing charges, wish to submit the following points.

1. It seems the Court has conceded our argument that the video footage of the alleged ‘invasion’ of Parliamentary House be made available to the Defence.

2. Enquiries as to who should be subpoenaed were hampered, by what can only be construed as discriminatory behaviour on the part of employees, unwilling to inform NAP members, of the person responsible for the tapes in question. Nor were these employees willing to inform NAP members of their names.

The courtesies extended to other members of the Public were withheld by these members of the “Speaker’s office, Hansard office and Facilities Management.”

3. The recent behaviour of the NT’s Police Minister Syd Sterling, in scrawling over - and rendering useless - a Parliamentary Submission circulated by NAP, may explain the unwillingness of these people to cooperate.

4. The continued and detrimental involvement of the NT Police (touched upon in the first submission) has seen a further undemocratic act involving the aforementioned Parliamentary Petition. NT Police seized the same Petition while it was being signed by the Public in Raintree Park yesterday. (7 August, 2002)

We ask the Court, ‘Would similar behavior by NAP and PARIAH members go ‘unnoticed’ by the Police?’

5. That NAP and PARIAH members are being treated differently by the NT Police, due to their political beliefs in such a deliberate and Public manner, is a ploy to intimidate the Public (as evidenced) and to punish NAP and PARIAH members. This constant pressure by the NT Police, is aimed at silencing dissenting political groups in Darwin - especially those critical of the Police.

6. Our web sites (submitted previously as evidence) demonstrate this belief in documented detail.

7. A common thread running through the undemocratic and politically motivated actions of the Police and their responsible Minister, is that they are untouchable and that the Law is a convenient means of perverting the Law.

8. Particularly when NAP and PARIAH are demanding an inquiry into the relationship between the NT Country-Liberal-Party and the NT Police. An inquiry into the corruption that seems so acceptable and which has been so seamlessly integrated, into Clare Martin’s NT Labor Party.

9. An eleventh hour ‘phone-call from the Parliamentary staff yesterday (August 7, 2002) assures us that the Clerk Ian McNeil is the person we should subpoena regarding the video tapes.

10. This matter has now been before the Courts on four occasions.

11. The first submission details our need to copy the original tapes, not the ‘tainted’ version cobbled together by the Police prosecuting us. We assume that this is now possible, despite the statements made by Clare Martin in Hansard, about her political need to prevent the tapes being viewed.

12. The Court is referred to the first submission for further argument. We once again request that the Court explain why floppy discs of transcripts are not made available, as well as the usual prohibitively expensive documentation.

Everyone should have equal access to the means to defend themselves in Court.