Rod Culleton high court hearing interrupted by jeering One Nation member
Party member John Wilson calls out that the court is a ‘star chamber’ as Culleton’s request for an amendment is turned down
7 December 2016
The high court hearing into Rodney Culleton’s eligibility as a senator was interrupted by a One Nation member who labelled it a “star chamber” and “kangaroo court” after Culleton lost a bid for an adjournment.
The dramatic interjection was made by member John Wilson, without Culleton’s knowledge. The senator’s chief of staff, Margaret Menzel, then remarked “he’s right” and his wife Ioanna Culleton said “at least someone has the guts to stand up [and say it]” as Wilson was asked to leave the court room.
Culleton was supported in court by lower house MP Bob Katter. Outside the court Menzel shared a letter from Katter to Culleton’s wife describing him as a “good man” and likening him to Christ - “a bloke 2,000 years ago” who had fought the good fight though nobody had thanked him for it.
Menzel said the letter was the act of a “true leader”.
Speaking outside the court, Culleton distanced himself from Wilson, saying he was “not a personal friend” and the “outburst was not required in the court”.
The disturbance came after Culleton’s counsel, Peter King, whose bill is being paid by taxpayers, argued for an adjournment based on a claim the Senate needed further time to consider whether to revoke the referral of his eligibility, and an alleged lack of procedural fairness in Culleton’s conviction in absentia for larceny, since annulled.
Justice Susan Kiefel, who will take over as chief justice in January, announced the court’s decision that it could not draw an inference that the Senate did not have the full facts when it agreed to the referral, nor speculate on whether it might revoke the referral.
The court refused adjournment, finding no defect in notice about the high court case and no merit in the argument that Culleton had been denied procedural fairness in the Armidale local court.
Wilson then interjected: “This is a star chamber, a kangaroo court.”
“There’s no jury here … you have no jurisdiction. You deny people their rights. There’s no justice here.”
Outside court Culleton said the case was going well, likening it to an Australian rules football game with his team “getting some good centre clearances”.
“Our goal shooters are pinging them – I don’t think we’ve put a point on the scoreboard yet, it’s all straight goals.”
After the full hearing, Culleton said people assessing their eligibility “would have to go down to a very fictional, long argument when filling it out, you’d have to be Einstein to figure out what it means”.
“At the start I think it was over the judges head for a while, but then as clarity came through, and we had some good precedents ... I believe we’ll win it.”
Outside court Wilson explained he had been a One Nation member years ago and rejoined in recent weeks. He said he had known Culleton for a year, attended his maiden speech and had given him advice in their shared crusade against Australian banks.
Wilson said Culleton had not known he would interject and suggested the senator would “probably be embarrassed” by it.
When the hearing resumed, the attorney general’s counsel, Neil Williams, argued that although Culleton’s conviction had been annulled, the conviction did exist and Culleton was subject to be sentenced at the time of the election.
Williams said that if Culleton was found ineligible a special count of ballots should occur, which was likely to result in the second One Nation candidate in Western Australia, Culleton’s brother-in-law, being elected.
Williams said Culleton’s possible ineligibility was “no reason to disregard the other preferences” of voters, and noted that 96% of the votes that elected Culleton were above the line, compared to just 2,100 votes [4%] for him below-the-line.
King advanced two arguments for Culleton’s eligibility: first, that the effect of the annulment was to restore him to his position before the conviction.
Secondly, that a conviction by itself was not sufficient because the disqualification in the constitution also required the person be subject to be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of one year or more. He argued that did not apply to Culleton because in New South Wales a conviction in absentia cannot result in such a sentence.
Noting one of the main precedents involved an “outsider” to politics, King remarked that “outsiders have a place in parliament as well”.
Culleton has publicly questioned the eligibility of judges because court writs omit that they are issued in the name of the Queen. The attorney general, George Brandis, has explained the error in forms does not bring into question the eligibility of judges or the jurisdiction of the high court.
A letter written to a Queensland magistrate by Culleton has led to his referral to the Queensland police for possible prosecution for allegedly attempting to pervert the course of justice.
Culleton has previously said he “totally rejects any suggestion of threats to any officer of any court, or any attempt to pervert the course of justice”.
But in the high court directions hearing – where Culleton represented himself – and the hearing on Wednesday, he and his lawyers steered clear of challenges to the jurisdiction of the court or eligibility of judges.
On Wednesday Culleton said it was “very decent” of Katter to come to the hearing, and said reporters should ask his fellow One Nation senators why they hadn’t done the same.
Asked about leaving One Nation, Culleton said: “I’m just concentrating on today, I mean, the court might decide that, we don’t know.”
On Tuesday One Nation leader Pauline Hanson said Culleton was not a team player, the party couldn’t work with him and he refused to listen to reason or advice.
On Wednesday afternoon the court reserved its judgment, to be delivered at an undisclosed