

Assange stands 'real chance' of election in Australia - nextstep
http://www.france24.com/en/20120519-assange-stands-real-chance-election-australia

======
tjmc
Here's hoping. Under the Westminster parliamentary system you can say anything
in parliament and not be held liable. Everything said is then transcribed and
made available as a public record. It's the ideal soapbox.

~~~
arethuza
Not quite "anything" - parliamentary privilege doesn't extend to anything
deemed to be "unparliamentary language". For example, you can't call a fellow
member of parliament a liar:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_privilege>

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unparliamentary_language>

------
alastairpat
I'm all for Assange's senate bid, but given he doesn't seem to have
declared/decided which state/territory he will be running for the Senate in,
I'm curious as to how these data can be considered accurate/representative of
any actual electoral outcome.

~~~
jwilliams
True - the closest analog I'd see is Nick Xenophon who won a senate seat in
2007 as an independent, with 15% of the primary vote.

If Assange did get 25% of the primary, then he'd be a shoe-in, probably at the
expense of a Green.

However, the article is a bit woolly. "25% would vote for" does not
necessarily mean the primary vote.

~~~
vacri
It's pretty easy for a minor party (well, 'one of the', not 'a') to pick up
the last senate seat in a state, given the way they're allocated. It all
depends on which way the preferences flow.

~~~
jwilliams
Yeah, you're probably right -- I went and had a look back at 2007. Xenophon
won, but a Green also picked up a Senate seat (in SA). The Greens polled just
6.5% and picked it up off preferences.

I was figuring his vote would come at the expense of the Greens, but even in
that case the major parties were marginal enough on the 6th seat to get the
Greens in.

(Plus the DLP won a seat in Vic in 2010, off just 2.3% of the primary).

I expect the next election will be quite a shake-up, especially in the Senate
- certainly can't see the major parties gaining. So, you're probably right
that preferences will dominate the 5/6th seats.

~~~
nl
Given the current political climate I think his seat might come at the expense
of a Labor senator.

------
chris_wot
Th government is on the nose at the moment. So is the opposition! A dead fish
has a good chance of being elected right now, if they aren't a member of the
major Liberal or Labor parties...

------
cletus
Running for the Senate would be an interesting move, to say the least, and
would probably create a headache for the Australian government that they don't
want.

I imagine Assange's lawyers have done their homework and have established that
from being on house arrest in the UK he could run for the Senate (contrary to
what 1-2 commenters here have said).

There's probably few better elections to run in than the next one. It looks
like the current Labor government will be decimated in the next election (in
some ways history is repeating itself from the Hawke-Keating years, which is
interesting).

Yet the population seems disillusioned with the opposition too. My biggest
problem with the opposition is their pointless continued opposition to the
NBN.

Anyway, the big potential headache for the Australian government here is
Assange would go from being a citizen possibly being extradited to the Sweden
(and potentially the US) to being a sitting Senator being extradited. While he
wouldn't be a head of state and enjoy those protections, I'm not sure if
there's any real precedent for extradition of someone in the government like
this.

Australia should be standing up to the US over this however so it's a headache
I would invite and welcome upon our government.

That all being said, I'm not sure I buy the theory that Assange's extradition
to Sweden is to get his extradited to the US. I seem to remember reading
something saying it was just as easy to extradite him from Britain so who
knows.

~~~
shimon_e
How many times does Turnbull have to say he isn't going to rip up the NBN?

He has two main problems: He doesn't want labour getting credit for something
liberal can. He doesn't believe labour is managing the project in with best
financial interest of the public and feels up to $10 billion could be saved.

This is the BS that is ticking him off: [http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-
national/new-homes-dudd...](http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/new-
homes-dudded-over-nbn-turnbull-20120517-1ysus.html)

35,000 new homes built last year had fresh new copper laid by Telstra instead
of fibre.

That copper isn't old, damaged, and incapable of fast speeds. It is brand new
and was a complete waste of money. Except for Telstra shareholders who get to
profit even more off the labour government once tax payers buy it all back to
replace with fibre.

------
nextparadigms
It would certainly make it a lot more interesting to see how the US Government
deals with him.

~~~
sebastianavina
I would love to see a wikileaks alternative leaking assange classified
documents.

------
rdl
Would this get him some form of immunity from civil/criminal prosecution?
Would it apply internationally? (diplomatic or consular immunity)

~~~
dsl
Despite what the movies tell you there is no such thing as true immunity.

If you commit a crime in another country under "diplomatic immunity", your
host country must decide to waive your immunity and allow you to be
prosecuted, or have you expelled back to your native country. The receiving
country could then request extradition for a criminal trial (so you
essentially get kicked out as a diplomat, and drug back as a citizen).

In the specific case of Assange, professional activity outside official
functions isn't protected at all. So if Australia did come to his defense and
claimed he was acting in a professional capacity for doing something like
leaking US military secrets, it would be an act of state sponsored terrorism.

~~~
slowpoke
_> it would be an act of state sponsored terrorism._

How would that be, in any way, shape or form, terrorism? If anything, it might
be espionage or something in that vein. Calling whistle-blowing terrorism is
disingenuous at best.

~~~
dsl
Terrorism is loosely defined as actions by an individual or organized group
against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing
societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

Almost word for word the mission statement of Wikileaks.

~~~
slowpoke
That's the stupidest definition of terrorism I have ever seen. You could call
pretty much ANYTHING slightly subversive terrorism under this definition.

Movements for social change? Terrorism.

Peaceful demonstrations against government policy? Terrorism.

Any sort of activism? Terrorism.

I stand by my opinion: calling whistle-blowing terrorism is a ridiculous
appeal to emotion, and anyone who even dares to attempt it should be laughed
out of the building.

------
tnuc
He has no chance. He needs to be in Australia to be elected or he will be
charged with electoral fraud.

Good luck to him but by the time he has dealt with his current legal "issues"
most people would have forgotten about him.

~~~
twelvechairs
Can you provide a source for this?

As far as I know (from an interview with Geoffrey Robertson, Assange's lawyer,
but also known as a respected senior lawyer and public figure in both the UK
and Australia) this is incorrect. It is possible to be elected when overseas,
however there seems to be a grey area as to what would happen to his seat if
he was unable to return to the country to occupy it in parliament.

~~~
tnuc
It's not really a grey area. There have been politicians who have failed to be
present enough days in their electorates in the past and suffered the wrath of
the electoral commission.

~~~
caf
This is quite simply untrue. There is no requirement to live in an electorate
to represent that electorate in Parliament, and in fact in the past it was
very common for country electorates to be represented by city politicians.
Antony Green has a great post debunking this myth:

[http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2012/02/local-seats-
for-...](http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2012/02/local-seats-for-local-
people-who-should-be-allowed-to-contest-elections.html)

(and Senators don't even represent electorates).

