Included below is an example of the letters I sent late in the evening of Monday 27 March to each of the 40 members of the Bring Julian Assange Home Parliamentary Support Group. I point out that, in spite of its size, the efforts of this group so far appear to have made little difference towards making the Albanese government act to end the UK's illegal imprisonment of Assange or even to just hold this government to account for its failure to do so. To make a difference, the Support Group needs to do a lot more than it previously has - from time to time, making statements, none of which have ever even been responded to by this government, or presenting petitions. The Group needs to find means to have Julian Assange properly debated on the floor of Parliament. One means to do so is to, once more, try to put to Parliament the foreshadowed motion that Andrew Wilkie tried unsuccessfully to put on 2 December 2021.

Example of one the e-mails I have sent to the each of the 40 members of the Assange Parliamentary Support Group

 

Dear Ms. Zali Stegall,

I write to you because you are listed as a member of the Bring Julian Assange Home Parliamentary Support Group (Assange Parliamentary Support Group). As a member of that group, you are surely aware that the imprisonment of Julian Assange, who has broken no law, is in violation of UK law, Australian law, and the First Amendment of the United States Constitution which guarantees the right to free speech.

I urge you, during this sitting week, which commenced yesterday, Monday 27 March, to use your voice in Parliament in a way that I believe would do far more to lift the cause of freeing Julian Assange than what has occurred in Parliament since the start of the 2021 sitting year.[1] If the Assange Parliamentary Support Group continues to restrict itself only to making statements, mentioning of Assange in passing whilst raising other issues, presenting petitions and putting questions in Question Time (3 times since February 2021), then I don't see how this can either persuade the government to use the power vested in it, as a sovereign government, to free Assange, or to effectively hold this government to account should it continue to fail to do so.

I am asking you to call for a Suspension of Standing Orders in order to, once more, try to have the plight of Julian Assange debated on the floor of Parliament, and, if that motion is again voted down, to call for a Division this time. Specifically, I am asking that you reput the foreshadowed motion which Andrew Wilkie tried unsuccessfully to put on 2 December 2021 [included below as an Appendix] or an updated adaptation of that motion, and to call for a Division if that motion is voted down.

Surely the circumstances are more than sufficiently urgent to justify the Suspension of Standing Orders that is necessary to put this motion: A UK court has ruled that Assange be extradited to the United States - a country which already attempted to assassinate him - to face a fate he considers worse than death - certainly even worse than what he is now enduring - a sentence of 175 years in solitary confinement without the possibility of, ever again, being able to see his wife Stella and their two children.

As you surely appreciate, this would be an enormous personal tragedy. It would also establish a precedent, whereby, in most parts of the world, any journalist, or, indeed, anybody, considered by the US government to threaten its vested interests, could be arrested and thence subjected to whatever punishment the US chooses to impose, up to imprisonment in solitary confinement for the rest of his/her life, or even the death penalty.

The US has, by one estimate, killed 20 milllion people since the end of the Second World War - in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Libya, Syria and elsewhere - and, today, continues its illegal military presences in Iraq, Syria, Cuba, and other countries. It spends more on its military than the next 5 highest spenders combined and has 745 foreign military bases across the globe. Any day now, this government, which has wrought so much death and destruction upon humankind, could have Julian Assange locked away in solitary confinement for the rest of his life for daring to reveal to the world so many of the ugly facts that it wanted to keep concealed from us.

As I implied above, I believe that if Prime Minister Anthony Albanese told the UK to end the illegal imprisonment and torture of Julian Assange today, the UK government would almost certainly comply and Assange would be free today. I also believe that Albanese knows this but has chosen not to use his political power to free Assange. He also knows that he could also make the US government desist from its illegal attempts to extradite Assange but has chosen not to. In fact, a Freedom of Information (FOI) search has revealed that Albanese, contrary to what he told independent MP Dr. Monique Ryan during the Question Time of 30 November last year, has neither asked nor even begged Rishi Sunak or Joe Biden to leave Assange alone.

I believe that if a debate on Assange were allowed in Parliament, all of this could be clearly shown. The evil conduct of both the US and UK governments towards Assange would be revealed for what it is to the people of Australia. The fact that the Australian government could have long ago freed Assange, but has chosen not to, would also be shown. Whilst those hostile to Assange on the floor of Parliament may have sufficient numbers to vote against Andrew Wilkie's motion, they cannot hope to win the debate.

I am asking you and a seconder to move for a suspension of Standing Orders so that the motion included below as an Appendix can be debated. That was the foreshadowed motion which Andrew Wilkie tried, unsuccessfully, to put on 2 December 2021.

I realise that, on that occasion, the necessary procedural motion to suspend standing orders so that Wilkie's foreshadowed motion could be put, was declared defeated by the Speaker. Nevertheless, I consider that, for Wilkie and for other members of the Assange Parliamentary Support Group, as a consequence, to have given up trying to have Assange's fate debated in Parliament, to be a mistake.

If, on that day, a majority of MPs truly voted not to allow a large number of MPs to argue the case for Julian Assange on the floor of Parliament, that is truly reprehensible conduct on their part and that should have also been made an issue. Wilkie should have called for a Division so that the names of those MPs who voted to suppress debate would have been made known to all Australians including their own constituents.

Since that day, real debate has been prevented. Support for Assange on the floors of both Houses has been restricted to statements in support of Assange, the presentation of petitions and, occasionally, questions put in Question Time.

None of the statements, nor any of the petitions have ever been responded to by any government minister. [2] The three Question Time questions put to government ministers in the last two years have only momentarily caused the government of the day to suffer a small degree of embarassment.

The choice that the Assange Parliamentary Support Group faces is either to continue as before - making statements, presenting petitions or occasionally putting questions in Question Time - with the likely outcome being little different to what was previously the case or ...

... try to bring about a proper debate. As I suggested above, once more:

Move for a suspension of standing orders so that the urgent matter of Julian Assange can finally be debated in the Parliament of his own country.

If the major parties again abuse Parliamentary Procedural rules to prevent debate, make that an issue also. Call for a Division so that the names of those who will have used their vote to prevent democratic debate on this vital matter can be known.

Appendix - Andrew Wilkie's December 2021 foreshadowed motion in support of Julian Assange

Independent Tasmanian MP Andrew Wilkie attempted to put the above motion to the House of Representatives on 2 December 2021, but as described above, the neccesary procedural motion to Suspend Standing Orders to allow this motion to be put was declared lost by the Speaker. Unfortunately, Andrew Wilkie did not call for a division. Consequently, it was not possible for those, who voted against Wilkie's motion being put, to be held to account for their unconscionable conduct. Should the Assange Support Group try, once more, to put this motion, as I have urged them to do above, this time, should the Speaker again declare the necessary procedural motion to have been defeated, they should call for a Division .

Footnotes

[1] In the total of 223 sittings (125 House and 98 Senate) since 2 February 2021 Assange was mentioned in only 30 sittings, Greens Senator Peter Whish-Wilson made substantial statements about Assange on 12 occasions. Tony Zappia and Julian Hill each spoke on 3 occasions about Assange. Senator Shoebridge once put a question and on one other occasion, mentioned Assange in discussing the Iraq War. Greens Senator Janet Rice once put a question to the Foreign Minister Liberal Senator Marise Payne on Assange and on one other occasion made a statement which mentioned Assange. Senator Larissa Waters and Senator Peter Khalil and Zali Steggall have each spoken once about Assange whilst Dr Monique Ryan once put a question about Assange to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.

On only two of these occasions have these efforts drawn any response from the sitting government - Senator Janet Rice's Question to the Foreign Minister Senator Marise Payne on 25 February 2021 and Dr Monique Ryan's question to Prime Minister Albanese on 30 November last year. On every other occasion, efforts by the Assange Parliamentary Support Group, whether to make statements or to present petitions, have been ignored. [2]

[2] The one exception to this is Foreign Minister Senator Penny Wong's disingenuous response to a petition put to her yesterday (Monday 27 March 2023) by Ms. Sue Templeman MP. On no other occasion have I seen any government minister even pay, to those who signed those petitions, the courtesy of even acknowledging those petitions.