Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

There are a lot of great things about this country, but this government—and that last speech—is not one of them. Protecting the rule of law and individual freedoms is vital, but this government's silence in the case of Julian Assange is cowardly and disgraceful. The government's line is simply 'Julian Assange is being afforded the usual consular assistance', but that is simply farcical, given the gravity of the situation. Julian Assange is facing extradition from the UK to the US to face charges under the Espionage Act for revealing war crimes and corruption by the US military.

This is not an everyday consular matter. The case has ramifications for individual freedoms, press freedom, the rule of law, the sovereignty of nations and democracy itself, for reasons that were very eloquently outlined by the member for Clark. But, overnight, the UN Special Rapporteur on torture, Nils Melzer, published an indictment of the case against Julian Assange, and he had this to say—and I want to read it at some length, because it is crucial:

The case of Julian Assange is nothing else than a modern show trial featuring politically motivated prosecutors, denial of justice, manipulated evidence, biased judges, unlawful surveillance, denial of defence rights, and abusive prison conditions. What sounds like a textbook example of dictatorial arbitrariness is in fact an actual precedent happening in the middle of Europe, the birthplace of human rights.

…   …   …

… this case reveals systemic dysfunctions that make our Western constitutional states look like "fair-weather democracies", where the protection of the law can be relied upon only as long as the machinations of the powerful are not fundamentally questioned … The Assange case must finally be recognised for what it is: a totalitarian attack on the rule of law and press freedom, without which a healthy democracy is not possible. If we do not soon want to wake up in a worldwide dictatorship, we had better rub the sleep from our eyes!

Those are not my words. They are those of the UN Special Rapporteur on torture.

As if the need for the government to take a stand wasn't already compelling, a few days ago it was revealed that meetings between Julian Assange and his lawyers in the Ecuadorian embassy had been secretly filmed by a Spanish surveillance company, most likely at the behest of the US. This is a clear breach of legal professional privilege and it casts serious doubt on the prospects of Julian Assange receiving a fair trial. And what has the government's response been to this revelation? Have they sought assurances from the UK or US that Julian Assange will be afforded due process? There has been absolutely nothing. This government that comes in here and beats its chest about individual freedoms and about protecting people in this country is doing absolutely nothing, despite the revelations, day after day after day of the fundamental rights of an Australian citizen being trashed—being trashed in a way that has fundamental consequences for whether reporters in this country will be able to report fairly and whether people in this country can be guaranteed that the government will back them if they ever find themselves falling foul of a government elsewhere.

There is nothing exceptional, though, about an Australian government making public its concerns about the legal process a citizen is facing in a foreign country. This argument that it can't speak up is just wrong. Whether it was Hakeem Al-Araibi facing extradition or Peter Greste in an Egyptian jail or David Hicks in Guantanamo Bay, Australian governments have challenged the dubious legal process of a foreign country on behalf of one of its own in the past. It's what governments can do, and it's what this government should be doing for Julian Assange. Australia shares a monarch with the UK, and, supposedly, we have a special relationship with the US. Now is the time to make those relationships count. If this government cannot make public its concerns with the UK or the US when the rights of one of its citizens are being so egregiously violated, then what does it stand for? And what do those rights stand for?

The crucial thing about this is that this case is not about whether or not you like Julian Assange. It's not about whether you agree that he was supporting one side of politics or another when he released the documents. It's about whether you think an Australian journalist who gets information that details criminal activity and then publishes it is entitled to the protection of this government and of the rule of law.

What we find from this government, which beats its chest about the rule of law, is that it is prepared to throw someone overboard at the earliest possible opportunity, to do nothing more than to appease an overseas government. This government has sold out our sovereignty to the United States simply because the United States has asked it to, and every Australian citizen should be very, very worried.

See this speech in context