n the political arena you can expect that ‘Aussie Battler’ condemned her policies and labeled her a Isome factions will engage in ‘dirty politics’. racist. Opposition was at its peak when Han- Pauline Hanson, one of Australia’s leading Pauline Hanson son successfully applied for an injunction to politicians, found out about dirty politics the prevent a network from playing a song with hard way when influential figures orchestrated Exonerated Of Fraud lyrics describing her as a male homosexual, a her wrongfully prosecution and conviction of prostitute and a member of the Ku Klux Klan. non-existent crimes. By Serena Nicholls Regardless of the demonstrations, Hanson re- mained an influential political figure and a The political rise of Pauline Hanson Hanson also spoke out against Australia’s potential threat to the Howard government. promotion of multiculturalism and the gov- Pauline Hanson began her political career in ernment funding that was allocated for Ab- The views expressed by Hanson and her One March 1996, when she won a convincing originals. In Hanson’s maiden speech she Nation Party greatly impacted Australia’s po- victory and was elected as the Independent stated that she “…did not believe that the litical arena. Some politicians begrudged Han- member of the federal House of Representa- colour of your skin determines whether you son for her immediate success in an arena that tives for Oxley, a suburb of Brisbane, in the are disadvantaged,” and that “…most Austra- often takes years to accomplish. Therefore, Australian state of Queensland. She suc- lians want our immigration policy radically what happened next was both satisfying for cessfully made the transition from the ‘fish reviewed and that of multiculturalism abol- some people and reprehensible for others. and chip shop lady’ to one of Australia’s ished. I believe that we are in danger of being leading politicians. Hanson almost immedi- swamped by Asians.”1 In accordance with The demise of Pauline Hanson ately climbed the political ladder and gained this view, Hanson believed that the solution to television notoriety. She became the Australia’s ‘race’ issue was to return to a The Howard government publicly turned media’s ‘best friend’ and at times received “white” Australia. These views were widely against Hanson after One Nation received al- more attention than all of Australia’s other reported around Australia and the Asia Pa- most one-quarter of the vote in the June 1998 politicians combined. Hanson’s appeal to cific region. This in turn placed immense Queensland election and won eleven seats in the media was not just because of her work- pressure on Prime Minister Howard. Legislative Assembly. In particular, Howard ing class background and that she was an questioned the party’s organizational practices attractive and dynamic woman, it was also Initially, Howard argued strongly for and election finances. Hanson responded to the result of the controversial views that she Hanson’s right to free speech, regardless of these claims by threatening to mount a cam- held. The issues that received the greatest its perceived racial content. Howard re- paign to devastate the Howard government at degree of publicity revolved around race, ceived strong criticism over his actions, or the next election. Howard’s right-hand-man, culture and welfare in Australian society. lack thereof. Many Australians urged How- Tony Abbot proceeded to surreptitiously cam- Hanson argued that she was a typical ard to make a public statement explaining paign against Hanson by soliciting others to ‘Aussie battler’ and that the government of that Hanson’s views did not represent main- commence litigation against One Nation.4 This Prime Minister John Howard was no longer stream Australia. This was necessary be- campaign to undermine Hanson enabled the in touch with the average Australian. cause many Australians were concerned that Howard government to narrowly survive the Hanson’s views would negatively impact federal election and remain in power. Hanson the perception of Australia and ultimately its also lost her legislative seat. One Nation began tourism. When Howard refused to publicly to lose momentum and was no longer consid- Fingleton cont. from page 19 refute Hanson’s views there was a public ered a political threat. After Fingleton’s settlement was announced, uproar. Howard was repeatedly criticized by Fingleton’s lawyer, Matt Woods stated, “The the media as being impotent and incompe- Then in 2001, One Nation dramatically resur- tent. Some even referred to Hanson as the faced by winning nearly 10% of the seats in payment to her is some recognition of the 2 injustice she has suffered. However, no tiger that Howard could not control. Emo- Queensland’s state election. That was a blow amount of money could make up for what my tions ran high with many arguing that to the Howard government, and sent the mes- client and her husband have been through.” 5 Howard’s failure to refute Hanson’s views sage that Hanson and One Nation were forces was because he identified with her policies. to be reckoned with that weren’t going away. Footnotes and sources: 1 In addition to their regular duties, a Co-ordinating The media interest in Hanson began to Four months after that election, the Queensland Magistrate allocates the work of the Magistrates Court, slowly fade until April 1997, when she co- police issued a summons against Hanson to for which they are paid an additional $2,000 per year. founded the One Nation Party. Hanson once face fraud charges. This assisted in the investi- 2 Fingleton v The Queen [2005] HCA 34 (23 June 2005), ¶42. The Court ruling recognized that a magis- again became prominent in newspaper head- gation against Hanson and resulted in her pros- trates protection from criminal liability for administra- lines. The unexpected phenomenon was ecution (One Nation co-founder David Ettridge tive actions was a companion to the principle Australia’s response to her. It seemed a sig- was also prosecuted). The Department of Pub- enunciated in Section 30 of the Code that, “a magis- trate is not criminally responsible for anything done by nificant segment of Queensland’s electorate lic Prosecutions alleged that Hanson falsely the magistrate in the exercise of the magistrate’s judi- was prepared to identify with Hanson’s poli- registered One Nation by submitting the names cial functions, although the act done is in excess of the cies. Fourteen months later, Hanson’s One of 500 supporters instead of party members. On magistrate's judicial authority.” Id. at ¶ 42. Nation Party took 11 out of the 88 seats in the the 20th of August 2003, a jury found Hanson 3 Fingleton Given $475,000 And Job Back On Bench, 3 Rosemary Odgers and Louise Crossen, The Courier- state parliament. Many suggested the main guilty. Hanson defiantly exclaimed, “Rubbish, Mail, Brisbane, September 2, 2005. reason for this phenomenon was Hanson ap- I’m not guilty ... it’s a joke.”5 4 Payout denied to former One Nation leader, The pealed to Australians who couldn’t under- Australian, October 27, 2005. 5 Fingleton Given $475,000 And Job Back On Bench, supra. stand why their lives were so tough, while She was then sentenced to three years impris- foreigners were perceived to have it easy. onment without the possibility of parole. Additional sources: Judge Wolfe stated the sentence was appro- R. v. Fingleton [2003] QCA 266 (26 June 2003) Although Hanson and the One Nation Party priate because Hanson had undermined Aus- Australia’s Hanson Free From Jail, BBC News, had widespread support, many demonstrators November 6, 2003. Hanson continued on page 19

JUSTICE DENIED: THE MAGAZINE FOR THE WRONGLY CONVICTED PAGE 18 ISSUE 31 - WINTER 2006 Hanson cont. from page 18 her rights violated, losing her freedom and A year after her conviction was quashed and she was having the door closed on her political career. released from prison, Pauline Hanson was a finalist tralian politics: “The crimes you have in Australia’s Dancing With The Stars in late 2004. committed affect the confidence of the peo- Political motivation behind Hanson’s ple in the electorate process.”6 Hanson’s co- false prosecution whitewashed and social policies of defendant Ettridge was also found guilty and Pauline Hanson, she sentenced to three years imprisonment. Both An investigation into Hanson’s prosecution was a victim of politi- defendants were immediately taken into cus- was conducted by the Crime and Misconduct cal and legal hound- tody and began serving their sentences. Commission (CMC). In January 2004, the ing. The only thing CMC issued a report which concluded that she was guilty of was Hanson’s exoneration “…no misconduct or other impropriety has thinking the Howard been shown to have been associated with the government would Hanson appealed her conviction. The main conduct of the litigation concerning the found- idly stand back and basis for her appeal was that the prosecution ers of the political party ‘One Nation’, Pauline allow their power to failed to establish beyond a reasonable doubt Hanson and David Ettridge, or with the police be weakened by her and the One Nation Party. that the persons named on the registration investigations leading to their prosecution.”10 were not members of the One Nation Party.7 The CMC also concluded that there was no The misuse of the criminal law to secure On the 6th of November 2003, the Court of evidence that suggested improper influence on Hanson’s wrongful conviction sets an ex- Appeal took one day to find that Hanson had the proceedings or the involvement of Tony tremely dangerous precedent. The in fact submitted the names of 500 party mem- Abbott and the Howard government. “vendetta” type dirty legal tactics used to bers, and therefore there was no legal basis for eliminate Hanson serves as a warning to any her conviction. It is reasonable to surmise that both the Court political upstart. It is now known that a Although the of Appeals and the CMC white-washed the person or group with a vendetta can use their Court quashed political motivation underlying Hanson’s position to influence the investigation, pros- Hanson’s convic- false prosecution. It seems more than coinci- ecution and possible conviction of an inno- tion, it empha- dental that Hanson was convicted four cent politician. Contrary to the judge’s sized that the months prior to the next federal election, in admonishment of Hanson at her sentencing, process leading to which she was standing as a candidate for the it is not Hanson who undermined the elec- her conviction Senate and One Nation had significant public toral process but the Howard government. was lawful. The support. Obviously, Hanson would be prohib- court explained ited from all political activity for the duration These political tactics are appalling. Austra- Hanson’s wrongful conviction was the result of her sentence and One Nation would floun- lians, as well as voters in all democratic of her inexperienced legal counsel and the der with its leader jailed. It likewise doesn’t countries, deserve the right to go to the prosecutor’s presentation of the case. The seem coincidental that the Howard govern- ballot polls with the confidence that there court also quashed Ettridge’s conviction. Han- ment began to publicly campaign against has been no extra-legal interference with son and Ettridge were released after three Hanson and the One Nation Party immedi- their choice of candidates. This is a basic months of wrongful imprisonment. ately prior to her being investigated for fraud. democratic right that should not be violated. The Howard government was concerned with Hanson denied compensation the probable impact of One Nation at the next Endnotes and Sources: election. In particular, Howard was concerned 1 McNamara, Lawrence (1998) ‘The Things You Need: Racial Hatred, Pauline Hanson and the Limits of In quashing Hanson’s conviction the Court that a loss of seats would result in a reduction the Law’ 2 Southern Cross University Law Review 92. emphasized that she would be ineligible for ex of his party’s power. All indications are that 2 Probyn, Fiona (1999) ‘’That Woman’, Pauline Han- gratia compensation for her three months of Howard united with other influential persons son and Cultural Crisis’ 14(29) Australian Feminist 8 Studies 161. wrongful imprisonment. This was based on to eliminate Hanson because she was a politi- 3 McNamara, Lawrence (1998) ‘The Things You the argument that “it should be understood that cal threat, and that the chronology of events Need: Racial Hatred, Pauline Hanson and the Limits of result [quashing Hanson’s conviction] will not leading to her demise was calculated. the Law’ 2 Southern Cross University Law Review 92. 4 Head, Michael (2003) ‘The Jailing of Pauline Han- mean the process has to this point been unlaw- son: A Victory for Democracy?’ 28(6) Alternative ful. While the appellants’ experience will in While many Australians questioned the legal- Law Journal 264. that event have been insupportably painful, ity and length of Hanson’s imprisonment, the 5 Hanson and Ettridge jailed for three years, Sydney Morning Herald, August 20, 2003. they will have endured the consequence of Howard government supported it. The deci- 6 R v Ettridge and Hanson, District Court of Queen- adjudication through due process in accor- sion to pursue Hanson for what were in fact sland, 20 August 2003. dance with what is compendiously termed the bogus fraud charges was successful in not 7 R v Hanson; R v Ettridge [2003] QCA 488. 9 8 Queensland doesn’t have a wrongful conviction rule of law.” This was upheld when Hanson’s only preventing her from running for the Sen- compensation statute, so the government must either quest for compensation was denied by ate in the next election, but it was also suc- grant an exonerated person an ex gratia payment, Queensland’s Attorney General in October cessful in forcing her to reassess her career which is a payment made without the state recognizing any liability or legal obligation, or the person must file 2005. This decision came after ex gratia com- goals. Shortly after Hanson was released from a common law suit for damages. pensation was granted to Australian Chief prison she vowed never to return to politics. 9 R v Hanson; R v Ettridge [2003] QCA 488. (De Magistrate Di Fingleton in September 2005, Thus the elimination of a potent challenger to Jersey CJ). 10 Crime and Misconduct Commission (2004) ‘CMC three months after her June 2003, conviction Howard’s political power was accomplished Report into Hanson-Ettridge Prosecution’, Media Re- for threatening another magistrate was without having to do so at the ballot box. lease, 23 January 2004. quashed. (See, “Magistrate Awarded $348,000 And New Job After Conviction Tossed,” in Hanson’s wrongful conviction sets a this issue of Justice:Denied.) Thus, Hanson dangerous precedent did not receive any compensation after having Regardless of how one views the economic

JUSTICE DENIED: THE MAGAZINE FOR THE WRONGLY CONVICTED PAGE 19 ISSUE 31 - WINTER 2006