Museum of Australian Democracy host sovereign citizens: The Guardian claim exclusivity over The Australian’s exclusive

Sovereign Citizens occupy the old Senate Courtyard in Old Parliament House

It’s been a strange week and if proof of this was required, then we need look no further than the Guardian claiming an exclusive on a story that had run in The Australian more than a day earlier.

On Tuesday in his Margin Call column, Yoni Bashan reported the peculiarly Canberra story of the Museum of Australian Democracy, aka the Old parliament, hosting 100 sov-cits who announced the criminal indictment of the great and the good in Australian politics and society while serving the pseudo law loonies light refreshment.

One hundred were there, not 50 as reported by the Guardian, because the group had booked for 100. Some wanted to bring their dogs in with them. Another 100 or so mingled outside perhaps comforted that they were standing in Magna Carta Place. The 12th Century concord is often cited in court by self-representing sov-cits to the general bewilderment of judges.

Sov-cits is short for sovereign citizens, a generic term for amorphous groups around Australia that have decided our laws are not for them. Better to make up their own or cherry pick archaic law like the Magna Carta. 17th Century Portuguese maritime law is also seen as important for some reason. Some academics prefer the term pseudo-law adherent but the term I find most useful as a primer is fringe dweller. That’s not necessarily an expression of geographical location, more a psychological state of social disconnection, where victimhood meets bizarre beliefs, circulated in echo chambers both online and in person.

The Australian was the first to learn of the MOAD shambles. On Monday morning, The Australian posed polite questions to the Museum’s management of a what the hell variety?

The Australian was the first to receive the official statement of explanation and regret from MOAD stating that the booking was made by the group directly with the caterers and had offered only an acronym by way of identification. Presumably, a mobile phone number or an email address was also supplied. No one at the museum knew what would be coming through the doors on Saturday afternoon but when the handful of museum security peered out of the windows and saw the red ensign flying, they must have known immediately they were in for an interesting shift.

Designated sov-cit sheriffs sporting purple polo shirts were directing their sov-cit brethren through the Old Parliament’s labyrinthine corridors. The men in purple are the sov-cit version of police. The budding sheriffs will have signed some legal gobbledygook, sworn an oath heavy in fake legal jargon and been deputised with a free purple polo shirt thrown in. Thus vast bogus authority is bestowed upon them while doubling their wardrobes in one fell swoop. Two birds, one stone.

It was “treason” with a side of tea and biscuits.

Other than some rowdy cheering there was no trouble. MOAD did summon the wallopers and the cops stayed on as observers. The 100 sov-cits assembled in the old Senate courtyard, helped themselves to tea, coffee, and dainty sandwiches with the crusts cut off, as speakers came forward to tell them every federal MP, all 227 of them, had been indicted for treason. Democide. A raft of other cobbled together pseudo-criminal charges. PMs from Howard to Albo, governors-general past and present, governors, judges, police officers, lawyers, and most disturbingly, a child protection officer, were also named in the mass phony prosecutions.

Oddly, some of the senate’s more colourful crossbenchers have not escaped the sov-cits’ wrath. Malcolm Roberts was named in the indictments as was Queensland’s Senator Gerry Rennick. Even Senator Ralph Babet was looking at a treason blue. Say it ain’t so, senator. No one has been spared and this reminds me that I am willing to offer my services as an alibi witness to any member of parliament facing sov-cit prosecution. Repeat after me, “I can’t be attainted of treason upon the Commonwealth and its people. I was with Jack all day. We played Scrabble.”

The Guardian report was journalism strictly by the numbers. Experts were contacted for comment. Calm was urged. No, the sov-cits had no legal basis to arrest the great and the good. Yes, it was probably best that the event was allowed to proceed. It surely was. Removing the dogless sov-cits once ensconced would have proven difficult and may not have been good for the decor.

It might all be hugely funny, and a rare case of sov-cits finally putting one over the man. The trouble is that sov-cits are amusing until they aren’t. Anyone with a functioning memory will recall the grand old building was subject to an arson attack by another sovereign citizen group in December 2021 which cost the Commonwealth $5.3 million in repairs. One man was ultimately sentenced to eight months in prison for arson. Another, convicted of assisting him, was given a non-custodial sentence. Justice, ACT style.

I doubt that MOAD will put its hand up to host the upcoming trials. Protocols for bookings are being reviewed, whispers of the dreaded counselling have been heard. Hard questions have been posed.

What the Guardian article appears to have missed entirely is that we are merely at the indictment stage. The trials are set to begin on March 7, venue TBA. Given that those who have been indicted are unlikely to appear – it will be especially difficult for Bill Hayden as he’s been dead for 18 months – convictions will almost certainly take place in absentia. There’ll be more pseudo-legal theatre and more self-important tub-thumping where violent rhetoric and threats are the order of the day.

Which reminds, how are we going with the national firearms register?