By Pip Hinman
The right to demonstrate is under threat. May 12 is the deadline for submissions to a parliamentary committee investigating "the right to legitimately protest or demonstrate on National Land and in the Parliamentary Zone".
In the background information booklet, prepared by the joint standing committee, so-called left winger and Deputy Prime Minister Brian Howe makes clear his concern that "there are a number of legislative and administrative issues which currently limit the ability to regulate activities on National Land".
Howe, who authorised the committee's investigation last December, wants to ensure that long-term protest activities, such as the Aboriginal Tent Embassy, the East Timor Liberation Centre and the Forest Embassy that have taken place in the parliamentary precincts, are better "controlled" or "administered".
A flick through the information booklet reveals that there are already ample rules and regulations governing what can and cannot be done on national land.
"National land" is defined as land which the Commonwealth is using or intends to use in the ACT. It is divided into two categories: land for the special purposes of Canberra as the national capital — diplomatic missions and the Australian War Memorial — and land required for Commonwealth purposes — Commonwealth government offices and the Canberra airport.
At a time of rising concern about a host of foreign policy and environmental issues, it hardly seems coincidental that there is bipartisan support for further effort to curtail potentially embarrassing protest activities in the capital.
However, there are already a range of laws dealing with "contempt of parliamentary privilege".
Section 49 of the constitution gives parliament the right to treat as contempt, and therefore impose penalties for, any act which "obstructs or impedes either house of parliament in the performance of its functions, or obstructs or impedes any MP or officer in the discharge of his or her duty".
Currently — and this is something this standing committee looks set to change — parliament cannot claim authority over the streets surrounding the parliamentary precincts, although it does claim privilege of access for MPs to attend parliament.
However, it is contempt to obstruct a MP who is going to or departing from Parliament House. The penalties for this can range from imprisonment or a maximum fine of $5000, to a public reprimand.
Existing Commonwealth laws prevent the erection of any building or "work" unless it is approved by both houses of parliament.
There are already "authorised protest areas" — no-one is permitted to camp within parliamentary precincts — and guidelines for demonstrators to conduct themselves appropriately. These rules include allowing access to Parliament House at all times or facing the use of "reasonable" force or arrest or detention.
The Public Order (Protection of Persons and Property) Act makes "unreasonably obstructing the passage of persons or vehicles into or out of Commonwealth premises" an offence. It is also a crime to engage in "unreasonable obstruction" while taking part in a protest on Commonwealth premises, trespassing on Commonwealth premises "without reasonable excuse", refusing to leave Commonwealth premises after being directed to do so and behaving in "an offensive and disorderly manner" on Commonwealth premises.
If these rules don't already provide ample opportunity to disperse and punish protesters, there's the Crimes Act of 1900, which is even more subjective and wide ranging. This law, which applies in both the ACT and the parliamentary precincts, makes it an offence to behave in a "riotous, indecent, offensive or insulting manner in, or within, the view or hearing of a person in a public place". Indecent language or offensive behaviour during a demonstration on "national land" may also constitute an offence.
Camping or erecting structures are prohibited by the Trespass on Commonwealth Lands Ordinance, 1932. And it is also a crime for more than 30 people to meet or assemble, "for an unlawful purpose", within 90 metres of Parliament House.
New guidelines to govern the conduct of public demonstrations in the parliamentary precincts were sent to the committee in February by the speaker of the House of Representatives and the president of the Senate. These 12 items include: stricter controls on where authorised protests may take place, stricter fines meted out to offenders and other rules of conduct which prevent the erection of structures, the selling of food and the hanging of banners, the "wilful" marking of the land or building.
Given that so many laws already exist to control protest activities, it seems more than a little paranoid to tighten restrictions on the democratic right to demonstrate. But then again, maybe the federal government knows something that we don't.
[The inquiry's terms of reference, which submissions should address, are: the right to protest or demonstrate; the meaning of legitimately; the definition of national land; the definition of parliamentary zone. Submissions can be of any length. A short background information booklet is available by ringing (06) 277 4355, fax (06) 277 8506. Check on the possibility of late submissions.]