11/16/10
FTA Critic Told To "Get A Visa" To Go To Australia
Tuesday, 16 November 2010, 4:13 pm
Press Release: Professor Jane Kelsey
FTA Critic Told To "Get A Visa" To Go To Australia
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
16 November 2010
On Sunday evening (14 November), Professor Jane Kelsey was detained at immigration at Sydney airport for about an hour at the beginning of a tour to launch a new book on the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. She was informed by a senior immigration official that she was not eligible for visa free entry to Australia on the grounds that she was not an ‘appropriate person’ under Australia’s 1994 immigration laws.
While eventually allowed to enter Australia on this occasion, Professor Kelsey was told she would need to apply formally for a visa for any future visits, and was advised to seek a waiver from the Australian High Commissioner.
The official relied on a Springbok tour conviction from the early 1980s, which he claimed had attracted a suspended prison sentence of one year and nine months. Despite claims by the official that ‘appropriate checks have been made’, no such sentence was ever imposed on Professor Kelsey or the others involved in the case. Indeed, the Court of Appeal overturned a binding-over order that would have prevented those involves from engaging in further political protest. Former Green MP Sue Bradford, who was also involved in the case, has confirmed that she has never had similar problems entering Australia.
Professor Kelsey describes this development as ‘totally bizarre’.
‘I am a constant visitor to Australia for professional and personal reasons – at least eight times in the past two years, including just one month ago for an academic conference on trade.’
‘I always tick the box about criminal convictions, which relate to the Springbok tour and Bastion Point in the early 1980s. They have the list on record at Australian immigration. Usually I wait 10 or at most 15 minutes and they wave me on. This twist came completely out of the blue.’
Professor Kelsey has expressed her concern to the Australian High Commissioner and sought clarification of her immigration status under Australian law, including whether she will be required to seek visa for future entry to Australia.
‘It is possible it is an ill-judged over-reach by super-officious immigration officials at Sydney.‘
‘However it is equally likely that my name has recently been flagged, presumably linked to my role in promoting critical debate on the TransPacific Partnership negotiations. Requiring me to apply for a visa each time I go to Australia would make it easier to monitor and restrict my movements. At the very least sends an intimidating message to me and to others.’
Last year Professor Kelsey raised concerns over the apparent surveillance by the SIS of her activities as a critic of neoliberalism and free trade agreements, which she argues are actually investor-rights agreements that impose severe constraints on New Zealand’s future policy choices and sovereignty.
‘This latest development seems to confirm that promoting informed and democratic debate on these secretly negotiated agreements is deemed a threat to national security. Everyone should be worried about the implications for academic freedom and informed debate in a democracy.’
- Press release from Professor Jane Kelsey.
ENDS
4/5/07
Lawyers call for abolition of sedition laws
Timothy Selwyn was charged with sedition for putting an axe through the PM's electorate office window. Photo / Kenny Rodger
The Law Commission has formally called on Parliament to abolish laws which prohibit rebellion against the state or the inciting of lawlessness.
Commission President Sir Geoffrey Palmer said the archaic offence of sedition was too wide and unclear and had been used to muzzle unpopular political speech.
Last year the commission asked for comment on its view that sedition laws should be repealed following police reviving the dormant law.
The review followed Timothy Selwyn being found guilty of sedition after he put an axe through Prime Minister Helen Clark's electorate office window and in a pamphlet called on others to commit similar acts in response to the foreshore legislation.
The Court of Appeal yesterday rejected an appeal for the conviction saying it was sound in law.
The man was also jailed for unrelated charges of benefit fraud, but the case provoked concern about the use of sedition laws.
More recently a barman in Dunedin was charged with sedition after he published a promotional pamphlet offering students the chance to win a petrol-soaked couch and swap a litre of petrol for a litre of beer.
Sir Geoffrey said today after hearing submissions the commission had decided it was "high time" sedition laws were removed from the statutes.
The Commission's report, Reforming the Law of Sedition, tabled in Parliament today recommends the seditious offences set out in sections 81 to 85 of the Crimes Act 1961 be repealed and not replaced.
"Where behaviour that would be covered by the existing sedition provisions needs to be punished, it can be more appropriately dealt with by other provisions of the criminal law," Sir Geoffrey said.
"By abolishing sedition, we will better protect the values of democracy and free speech."
Sedition is a historic law intended to protect the Crown from attempts to undermine its authority. In New Zealand law it also stands as an offence of inciting lawlessness and disorder.
The commission said in its report to Parliament that offences such as incitement to break laws, conspiracy and treason remained in statute and charges of sedition invaded the democratic value of free speech for no adequate public reason.
- NZPA
A statement from Tim in prison…
“The Court of Appeal has not properly understood the context of the statement and has effectively ruled that there is no freedom of speech in regard to communicating with the media.”
“The Court’s decision is an abomination to justice, an assault on the press, a muzzle on dissent and a green light to police excess and as such I will fight it to the last millimeter.”
“It cannot stand. I am bitterly disappointed and aghast at the ruling”.
Tim Selwyn
http://www.tumeke.blogspot.com/
