Julian Assange to run for Australian Senate

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/julian-assange-to-run-for-senate-20130130-2dl92.html

by gavinballard • 13 years ago

180 115 13 years ago

theage.com.au

kmfrk3• 13 years ago

Don't Australia have extradition treaty agreements with the U.S.?

jeza• 13 years ago

Might be harder to extradite a senator?

kmfrk3• 13 years ago

Definitely harder, but I just wonder if I'd feel comfortable with this as my only plan to avoid prosecution.

gavinballard• 13 years ago

I imagine it's probably a bit tricky to extradite a sitting member of the federal Parliament...

digitalengineer• 13 years ago

Extradite, waterboard, soletary confinement, sleep deprivation... The only positive thing is it would set a nice precedent for corrupt Parliament members.

rmc3• 13 years ago

Several IRA terrorists have been elected to the UK parliament whole in prison. Doesn't mean they were out of prison, they still had to stay in prison

kmfrk3• 13 years ago

A suspected criminal is a suspected criminal; I don't know what the tradition is in Oz, but wouldn't they vote (present a majority) to nullify any diplomatic immunity?

I know about cases in parliamentary democracies where someone's immunity has been nullified - assuming they have it in Australia - but only in domestic disputes, not international.

lucian1900• 13 years ago

Extraditing a senator for whatever reason would be much more obviously political discrimination.

vacri4• 13 years ago

It's not a problem because there's no way he'd get in. Even people sympathetic to him as a person would think he'd be incredibly ineffectual - a literally absent senator.

And yes, we have extradition treaties with the US - a few years ago, we dutifully handed over a hacker who had never set foot in US soil, because his activities were harming US profits somewhere.

EDIT: It reminds me of a Mad Magazine gag: One of the good things about being a senator is that you get to use the title The Honourable right up until they throw you in jail for all the things you did.

madao• 13 years ago

I doubt he would actually get into senate, the ranks and file,would just use his evasion of litigation as volatile ammunition to make sure his stay in politics is a quick one

chris_wot17• 13 years ago

Rank and file of what precisely?

tokenizer• 13 years ago

If for anything, I hope he wins so he can go back outside, and live a decent life.

twelvechairs• 13 years ago

There's no guarantee that winning a senate seat would allow him to exit the UK. That said it would add considerable political pressure...

jacques_chester24• 13 years ago

Neither major party really thinks much of Assange. There might be some feeble protests but in practice the UK would be in the same position they are now.

chris_wot17• 13 years ago

There's no guarantee he'd actually win ether :-(

Kiro2• 13 years ago

You don't want him to stand trial first?

flyinRyan• 13 years ago

The charges were already dropped, then the prosecutor mysteriously replaced and the case reopened. The whole thing is a farce so there's no reason to bother with any trial.

nemof• 13 years ago

He could do that right now.

belorn• 13 years ago

If he won, he would be the first person doing so while not being physically in Australia during the election.

caf4• 13 years ago

That's not true at all - for example Adair Blain was re-elected as the Member for Northern Territory in the 1943 election whilst being held as a POW by the Japanese.

TamDenholm• 13 years ago

Is he still in the Ecuadorian embassy? I've not really heard what hes doing or where he is recently.

0x0• 13 years ago

Yep, there were images of him receiving a posted package containing a GPS & a camera a week or two ago: https://twitter.com/bitnk

ssharwood• 13 years ago

Assange announced this in early 2012, then again late in 2012 and then again today to co-incide with the announcement of Australia's September 14 election. So yes, by all means, let's give the same piece of news coverage for a a THIRD TIME. There's VALUE in that aggregation.

mr_eel4• 13 years ago

Saying 'I might run for the Senate' is different to the announcement of a federal election and then confirming that yes, he definitely will run.

If you don't think that's newsworthy, aaaaah, you're nuts.

adaml_6232• 13 years ago

Nice idea. Become a Senator and try for diplomatic immunity. Walk out of the Ecuadorian Embassy and wave goodbye to the police who have been waiting for him for the last umpteen months.

The legal wrangling could become quite complicated if he succeeded. If the voters in Oz realise how annoyed the UK government would be if he did this then that would help his odds even more.

For US residents I'll point out that Senate spots in Australia are won using a state based proportional system with multiple Senators for each of our 6 states and 2 territories. This means that independent and minority groups can often get 1 or 2 Senators into the upper house.

jacques_chester24• 13 years ago

> Become a Senator and try for diplomatic immunity.

Being a Senator doesn't give you automatic immunity. Immunity is a privilege extended by the host country to a guest's diplomatic corps. It can be revoked at any time.

Neither of Australia's major parties is particularly fond of Assange and I don't think the UK would feel any compunction in refusing to extend immunity to Assange.

hartror• 13 years ago

Annoying the English is a national pastime.

rmc3• 13 years ago

Why do you think the UK wouldn't be able to arrest him if he was an Australian senator? Some IRA terrorists were elected to the UK parliament while in prison. They still had to stay in prison. (the UK changed their laws to prevent anyone running for election if they are currently in prison)

uvdiv2• 13 years ago

That's UK law applied to UK lawmakers; there's nothing diplomatic about that.

droithomme• 13 years ago

> IRA terrorists

You seem confused to refer to freedom fighters defending their nation against the tyranny of the british imperialists in such a manner.

End the illegal English occupation of Ireland.

femto• 13 years ago

It'll be an uphill battle, as I can't see him doing a preference deal[1] with a major party. The Greens might prefer him, but I can't see the two major parties doing so. It will be a publicity coup though.

---------

[1] Explanation: A preference deal means a party agrees to place another party further up it's how-to-vote card, the order usually being determined by what the party thinks will deliver the most self benefit. In the Australian Senate, voters can either indicate their own preferences by numbering every square (typically 150 of them) in the bottom section of the ballot paper, or a single mark "above the line" in the top section, meaning they agree to vote according to the party's how-to-vote card. Most people do the latter, as it is quicker, requires less thinking and is far less arduous (a single number wrong means your vote is informal, and may not be counted). Consequently preference deals are key for minor candidates.

---

Edit: fixed error. Federal elections are not optional preferential.

adaml_6232• 13 years ago

Good point. As well as that there is the question of him being relatively forgotten during the 8 month election 'campaign' that's just been announced.

Australians are going to be even more tired of their politicians by September but that's a separate story.

chris_wot17• 13 years ago

You've got that around the wrong way. The Senate is not proportionally worked out when determining Senator numbers. That's the House of Representatives. There are currently 76 senators, 12 from each State, and 2 each for the Northern Territory and the ACT.

jacques_chester24• 13 years ago

I think he was talking about the voting system, rather than the number of Senators from each state.

jacques_chester24• 13 years ago

So far as I can make out ... he can't stand.

Australian Constitution, s16: "The qualification of a senator shall be the same as those of a member of the House of Representatives."

s34(i): "... must be an elector entitled to vote at the election of members of the House of Representatives, or a person qualified to become such an elector ..."

Australians are allowed to be overseas electors only if they intend to return to Australia within 6 years.

I don't think a court could reasonably conclude that Assange's intention to return would be a serious intention, given that he is going to be under an effectively indefinite house arrest.

Even if he did get elected, he would eventually be evicted for failing to attend sittings.

(Of course, I am not a lawyer or an electoral commissioner).

chris_wot17• 13 years ago

Going straight to the source, it's actually in the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, section 94, found here:

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/cea1918233...

jacques_chester24• 13 years ago

Thanks, I didn't dig down that far.

When did he leave Australia? He might run afoul of s95(1B):

"An application that is made after the elector ceased to reside in Australia must be made within 3 years after the day on which the elector ceased to reside in Australia."

caf4• 13 years ago

Antony Green wrote a posting on this issue (and Assange's general chances of being elected) here: http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2012/12/what-chance-of-j...

The short of it is that being qualified to become such an elector is a broader category than actually being on the electoral roll - you don't need to be on the roll to run for the Senate, just meet the basic requirements in S93.

jacques_chester24• 13 years ago

I still think a court would be asked to rule on the question of "intention to reside", which is what the whole thing revolves on.

Assange can wish to reside in Australia inside the 6 year deadline. But that's not the same as being realistically able to. In that case, he may be unable to form a legally meaningful intent.

Or the Act might be read in the sense that intent is intent, regardless of whether such an intent could ever be realised.

In either case, watch for this section to be rewritten after the election. Or even before.

hexagonc• 13 years ago

If questions of residence are in consideration, you would think things would be complicated by his request for asylum from Ecuador. That certainly doesn't suggest he intends to return to Australia in 6 years.

jacques_chester24• 13 years ago

Excellent point.

contingencies• 13 years ago

Summary: Weak my mom says I'm cool hit-piece by AAP, Australian Associated Press.

AAP is 90% owned by News Ltd and Fairfax, the two major publishers in the country, who promote it as a national organization but have a massive commercial interest in the media status quo. The media status quo is threatened by Assange, who has been extremely vocal about the failures of journalism and would presumably seek to re-regulate this area to encourage alternative media.

As mass media is a strong ally of big business and established political groups, he fights really tremendously big economic and political forces (his words, Cypherpunks, 2012).

I for one wish him the best of luck. It's time to move over, old guard. Let's get some socially and technically-informed discussion back in to Australian politics before it gets any more irrelevant.

chris_wot17• 13 years ago

I've not bothered reading the SMH (and by extension, The Age) online for a long time. The online version is weak, lazy journalism, incredibly (to my mind) even worse than The Daily Telegraph.

Check out www.smh.com.au now... More than a third of the articles are about celebrities, or are vapid commentary on meaningless issues. There's a bit of content, but nothing really groundbreaking. And today is a day when there is easy news, as an election was announced by the Australian PM.

The SMH used to be great. Not any more. Old media is indeed dying.

jacques_chester24• 13 years ago

I've said in other places that there are two Sydney Morning Heralds.

One is an old fashioned high-church leftie yawnfest staffed mostly by people who dine out on stories about being stoned in the 60s.

The other is a tabloid bilge pump.

The bilge pays for the yawnfest and everybody tries to pretend that the pulpit isn't being subsidised by the people it rails against.

taligent• 13 years ago

Online is terrible. In print and on the iPad it is far better.

But I fear for Fairfax when the Guardian officially launches: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/australia

fourmii• 13 years ago

So what do you read online then? I'm a displaced Melburnian living in the States and have been reading The Age online for ages, simply because it was the paper I use to read when I live there, many moons ago...

celticninja• 13 years ago

I used to enjoy reading SMH when I lived in OZ, about 10 years ago, I even kept up with smh.com.au when I returned but in the last 6 or 7 years I have probably checked it about 6 times and each time realised why i dont go there any more.

dpearson• 13 years ago

> Old media is indeed dying.

I can't speak for Autralian media, but "old" media like the New York Times and the Washington Post in the US seem to still do well for themselves. Many big investigative pieces still come from newspapers, as most online-only outlets don't yet have the resources for that work. Newspapers are certainly less responsive (and the smaller papers are declining in quality, unfortunately), but for high-quality journalism the old guard has yet to be beat.

dools• 13 years ago

I use http://www.smh.com.au/text/

coopdog• 13 years ago

If you knew just how understaffed they were compared to even just a few years ago. The money left print media with the classifieds and they can't afford to pay for journalism (which was always a cost center) any more, everyone is doing about 8 jobs and just printing press releases. Combine that with inefficient layers of management fat from the good times and employees who haven't upskilled in decades (again, a product of the good times), and it's easy to see why small, digital teams are going to thump old media.

(obvious exception is the New York Times, who seem to be doing a great job)

vacri4• 13 years ago

"back into"? Rose-coloured glasses perhaps?

jacques_chester24• 13 years ago

If you think AAP hacks give a flying fig about the uber-politics of global news, wait until you meet one.

Mostly they're interested in filling their daily quota of pap. And scamming free feeds, every time I've ever dealt with AAP journos the subject of lunch or dinner at my expense has somehow come up.

eldonnn• 13 years ago

i'm a green voter but i'd vote for assange in the senate - because he at least stands up for what he believes should be said. the other two main parties in oz are competing with each other to attract the swinging 20% that will give them the election. so they do not care about their electoral base (don't forget we have compulsory voting here, and long may it reign - none of that attracting younger voters crap we had to endure in the UK in 2004). btw, i believe from what i've read that the charges against assange in sweden are trumped up. the US has put pressure on sweden to deliver another 'example' of how powerful they are.

jacques_chester24• 13 years ago

It would actually be easier for the USA to extradite Assange from the UK than from Sweden. Extraditions under European Arrest Warrants are governed by a EU Council document which gives the veto powers to prevent re-extradition while proceedings are underway.

noarchy• 13 years ago

I'd almost respect this effort more if it were part of a plan to get diplomatic immunity, as suggested by others. But otherwise, this should spell the end of Assange as a "folk hero" in some corners of the digital world. I suspect that he could accomplish much more in his Wikileaks capacity than he ever could as a politician.

damian2000• 13 years ago

Maybe he should join forces with the Australian Pirate Party (http://pirateparty.org.au/) - they have some similar views.

cabalamat2• 13 years ago

I was thinking the same thing. Setting up his own Wikileaks party would be a division of resources.

mr_eel4• 13 years ago

I think focussing on the Senate run as an effort to avoid extradition is missing the point.

It's two things. One is to actually try and do some good via a spot in the Senate. Cynicism might tell you that's not right/too simple. Ignore that feeling. Some people do actually have ideals.

Secondly, it's a bit of good old shit-stirring. Certainly something we need in Australian politics.

tehwalrus• 13 years ago

...from his self-imposed prison, while facing as-yet-unanswered rape allegations? (FYI I have no idea if he's guilty, would probably want a court to examine it before I come to a conclusion.) how does he plan to even get to Australia to take up the seat if (by some miracle) he wins?!

zachinglis• 13 years ago

I'm not sure how well this'll work for him. He's made an enemy out of most people. I expect it'd be an even harder job for him than most.

rikacomet• 13 years ago

Is this to get out of his embassy based exile?

ttar• 13 years ago

I'll vote for him

Julian Assange to run for Australian Senate

Related Stories