Seven years jail for mine protesters under Mike Baird’s new laws

MEDIA RELEASE – 10 March 2016

The Greens NSW Mining Spokesperson Jeremy Buckingham today said it was outrageous that the NSW Government’s Inclosed Lands, Crimes and Law Enforcement Legislation Amendment (Interference) Bill 2016 currently before the parliament will change the definition of a mine site so that peaceful protesters against coal and coal seam gas will face jail sentences of up to seven years for simply expressing their democratic rights.

Section 201 of the Crimes Act 1900 was originally intended to stop serious acts of industrial sabotage by protesting mine workers in the 1980s, but the Bill before parliament expands the definition to encompass coal seam gas sites and construction sites after the courts ruled that protesters trying to stop the construction of Maules Creek coal mine could not be prosecuted under this section as it was a construction site, not a mine.

“Under these draconian laws, Wallabies Captain David Pocock and scores of ‘Knitting nannas’ could be thrown in jail for years simply for standing up for what they feel is important,” said Greens MP Jeremy Buckingham.

“This section of the law is intended for serious acts of sabotage.  It is wrong to apply this section to someone exercising their democratic rights by standing in front of a mining truck, or trespassing with a bike lock and a banner against coal or coal seam gas.

“The government is intimidating protesters with threats of long jail terms to please their mates running the big mining and gas companies.

“Mike Baird should recognise that the significant movement by farmers and others against coal seam gas and coal in NSW is an issue requiring a political solution, not one that will be solved by police arresting protesters and throwing them in jail or issuing crippling fines.”

 

3 comments

  • IT STATES UNDER SECTION 118 OF THE AUSTRALIAN FEDERAL CONSTITUTION (AFC) “FULL FAITH AND CREDIT SHALL BE GIVEN, THROUGHOUT THE COMMONWEALTH TO THE LAWS, THE PUBLIC ACTS AND RECORDS….”, WHEREAS UNDER SECTION 117 OF THE AUSTRALIAN FEDERAL CONSTITUTION IT STATES “A SUBJECT OF THE QUEEN, RESIDENT IN ANY STATE, SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT IN ANY OTHER OTHER STATE TO ANY DISABILITY OR DISCRIMINATION….”. SURELY THIS “POLICE STATE STATUTE” IS AN INTENT OF PERFIDY (A BREACH OF SECTION 118) BY AN INTENT TO DISQUALIFY (A BREACH OF 117 AFC) NOT ONLY THE LEGAL RIGHT OF THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH BUT ALSO THE LEGAL RIGHT OF PASSIVE RESISTANCE (NON VIOLENT PROTEST). IF YOU AGREE WITH THAT, THEN WHY HAVE YOU NOT BROUGHT IT EITHER UP IN PARLIAMENT OR BEFORE THE MEDIA. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE, THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO BREACH OF THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION (RE BOTH CITED SECTIONS), THEN COULD YOU EXPLICATE YOUR DISAGREEMENT. THIS IS A GRAVE ISSUE THAT CANNOT BE SUBJECTED TO PRETERMISSION. IT HAS BEEN SEEN ON FACEBOOK, THAT BOB BROWN HAS TAKEN PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE TASMANIAN GOVERNMENTS “POLICE STATE STATUTE”, AS SUCH, WHY HAS VERY LITTLE BEEN HEARD FROM YOU.

    Like

  • We need lawyers, church people and lots of nanas to fight this- remember that East Germany was defeated by ordinary people marching. Seven years for trying to protect animals and water? Murder often attracts lesser penalties. Come on Churches- you are not all child fiddlers! Get active.

    Like

  • Liberals….Hating Australians, a new way, everyday!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s