I am seeing a common thread appearing in social media today, following the release of Justice Rares findings into what has been tackily called, Ashbygate.That thread, or indeed, that single word I see being used in a somewhat cavalier manner, is SEDITION. A powerful word and terminology I find disturbing, especially coming from those on the left who seek some form of retribution for what they see as a perversion of Australia’s democratic process through manipulation of judicial due process. Sedition, as defined by Wiki says:
In law, sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority to tend toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interests of sedition.
Sedition is the stirring up of rebellion against the government in power. Treason is the violation of allegiance to one’s sovereign or state, giving aid to enemies, or levying war against one’s state. Sedition is encouraging one’s fellow citizens to rebel against their state, whereas treason is actually betraying one’s country by aiding and abetting another state. Sedition laws somewhat equate to terrorism and public order laws.
Wiki goes on to cite peculiarities in the Australian legal system. What Justice Rares found from the JAMES HUNTER ASHBY v COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA and PETER SLIPPER civil case is NOT sedition. Read the findings and you’ll clearly see that for yourself. What Justice Rares found was an attempted perversion of due process through the bringing of a vexatious claim designed specifically to “injure Mr Slipper in order to advance the political interests of the LNP and or Mr Brough”. What we’ve seen dragged into the harsh light of day are the sociopathic leanings of a certain ideological mindset which still, after five years and two Federal elections, refuses to accept that democracy is the will of the majority of the people, and not a tool for access to power.
Yes, the Liberal-National Coalition parties have a case to answer here. At the very least Mr Brough needs to be held to account, dis-endorsed from pre-selection for Fisher and made to return to the political wilderness. The LNP political leadership needs to stand clear, disavow whatever actions it may or may not have been involved with behind the scenes, and it’s is quite apparent that there were machinations behind those scenes. The blatant stupidity of this saga smacks simply of more sour grapes of the same kind we’ve seen conservatives sucking on since November 2007. What makes the circumstances surrounding this affair even sadder is the use and abuse of the people’s House, the people’s time and the waste of the people’s money on what is clearly a desperate grab for power at any cost, which would never have eventuated in any case. Australia’s democratic system is far, far stronger than the house of cards some conservatives obviously believe it to be. Numbers in the Parliament have not changed, either before or now, after this affair has come to it’s miserable end. The system carries on, as intended. We go to an election sometime in 2013. We elect a new government, of whatever colour & flavour the majority decide. That is democracy in action. The rest is just detritus left stinking in the Sun of the bright and honest day which our Parliamentary system provides. If anything needs to happen, it’s that someone take steps to clear away the mess.