Councillor Jonathan Sri found guilty of prohibited protest, but other charge thrown out
A controversial Brisbane Greens councillor has been found guilty of a prohibited activity in Queen St Mall after a feisty exchange between lawyers and a magistrate, but had another charge relating to the same incident thrown out.
QLD News
Don't miss out on the headlines from QLD News. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Brisbane City Councillor Jonathan Sri has been placed on a good behaviour bond after being found guilty of undertaking a prohibited activity in the city’s Queen St Mall.
But the Greens councillor, who stood in the mall on September 25, 2020, with three others in a peaceful assembly, was found not guilty of failing to obtain consent to hold a sign.
Cr Sri held up a sign saying “Say no to the cashless welfare card” for about 15 minutes, Brisbane Magistrates Court heard.
Brisbane City Council claimed Cr Sri had no consent or permission to communicate advertising material in the mall, which was a regulated activity.
Magistrate Coates dismissed the complaint against Cr Sri, finding there was no commerciality in the sign’s intent and it could not be found to be an ad or advertising material.
However she found Cr Sri guilty of undertaking a prohibited activity in the Queen St Mall by conducting an unauthorised public assembly with others.
A city mall operations manager told Brisbane Magistrates Court that at no time did Cr Sri impede pedestrians, there were no complaints and the four were wearing masks.
On September 24, 2020, Sri gave council notice of his intention to hold a public assembly in the mall the next day, but council did not make an order allowing it.
Ms Coates said Cr Sri was “no debutante” to council local laws and at the point of his event no decision about approval of his assembly application had been made.
He said when Cr Sri put in his application the day before the event it gave BCC insufficient time to consider it appropriately and provide notice of permission.
He also did not give regard to council’s due processes or even his right to challenge a decision.
Human rights’ limitations had to be considered by the council, the magistrate said.
“Pedestrians walking in the Queen St Mall have equal rights to a free and unencumbered passage,” Ms Coates said.
The council’s regulation of laws reflected the council’s legislative agenda.
“The regulation of council preserves the amenity of the mall and the rights of others to enjoy,” the magistrate said.
She said the process of approval adopted by the council balanced the competing human rights and other interests, because the council was required to balance all competing interests in the approval process.
Ms Coates found the process of approval of a permit for assembly was a reasonable limit, “that is justified in a free and democratic society”.
She refused Cr Sri’s application for the case to be referred to the Supreme Court for consideration of the alleged offences under the Human Rights Act.
The magistrate ordered Cr Sri, who had no previous convictions, to be released on a $1000 six month good behaviour bond and she did not record a conviction.
She also declined to make a costs order.
Outside court Cr Sri said he was pleased to be found not guilty of holding advertising signage in the mall, but the laws about unlawful assembly remained ambiguous.
“I think a lot of residents would be genuinely surprised to hear that it’s illegal to hold a protest in the mall, even when you are not blocking any footways, even when you’re not disrupting other people,” Cr Sri said.
“This is a protest with four people for less than 15 minutes peacefully standing in the mall holding signs and I still got taken to court for it.
“I think that says a lot about the state of our democracy today and raises concerns that council is going way too far in cracking down on the right to peaceful protest.”
He said it should not be an offence to have a peaceful assembly in the mall.
“So technically, three people who meet up in the mall to talk about the weather could be engaging in an assembly, which means they are violating that local law,” Cr Sri said.
“So there’s a really clear problem here with the way council local laws are drafted which creates a potential conflict with the broader rights to peaceful assembly.”
“…The fact that the council is willing to waste ratepayer resources and try to fine me thousands of dollars for such a harmless activity is really concerning and highlights that the council is politicising this.”
During final submissions Cr Sri was taken to task by Magistrates Coates over his facial reaction to comments by BCC lawyer Kevin Cartledge, warning him if he did it again he would have to leave the court.
There also was a feisty exchange between Mr Cartledge and the magistrate, as he made final submissions before sentencing.
“Your honour, please do not roll your eyes at me like that, and hear what I have to say,” Mr Cartledge said to Ms Coates.
“That’s a very inappropriate comment, Mr Cartledge,” the magistrate said.
“It is inappropriate for you to not allow me to make submissions and to roll your eyes at the suggestion that I may say something that you will not like,” Mr Cartledge replied.
The Magistrate did not respond to the comment from Mr Cartledge.
More Coverage
Originally published as Councillor Jonathan Sri found guilty of prohibited protest, but other charge thrown out
‘Can Do’ Crisafulli: Newman anoints his successor, with a catch
Campbell Newman says David Crisafulli will be a can-do premier, but has reservations despite declaring him the winner of the second leaders’ debate. WATCH THE REPLAY
Jury deciding case of teen murder accused told to ignore crime debate
A Brisbane jury has been told not to be swayed by political debate around crime as they retire to deliberate on the case of a juvenile charged with murder.