Much as Brandis is generally his own little truth-free zone, I really can’t see this getting anywhere.
Presumably Culleton’s complaint is related to Brandis’s role in his being referred to the High Court over his false declaration as a candidate. Firstly, this would seem to be part of Brandis’s right and role as a senator, as the relevant house (in this case the Senate) has the power to so refer a member. I can’t see how this could meet the definition of the offence: that “the person attempts to obstruct, to prevent, to pervert or to defeat the course of justice in relation to a judicial power”.
Second, Brandis’s (and the Senate’s) actions would appear to be moot anyway, as a petition had already been lodged with the court by Bruce Bell. Consequently, Culleton’s candidature (and election) would have been found to be invalid anyway.
No doubt Brandis will be up against the wall come the revolution, but the only thing that come come out of this is that Culleton will lose more money.
Loading...
Another one BITES THE DUST? I TRULY WISH THIS TO BE THE CASE! THIS AG BELIEVES THAT HE IS ABOVE HE LAW.
HE PROVED THIS WITH MARK DREYFUS TANTRUM!!
NOW IS THE CHANCE FOR AUSTRALIAN POLITICIANS TO COME CLEAN AND
‘..DRAIN THE SWAMP” AS CORRUPTION IS CONTAGIOUS!!
Much as Brandis is generally his own little truth-free zone, I really can’t see this getting anywhere.
Presumably Culleton’s complaint is related to Brandis’s role in his being referred to the High Court over his false declaration as a candidate. Firstly, this would seem to be part of Brandis’s right and role as a senator, as the relevant house (in this case the Senate) has the power to so refer a member. I can’t see how this could meet the definition of the offence: that “the person attempts to obstruct, to prevent, to pervert or to defeat the course of justice in relation to a judicial power”.
Second, Brandis’s (and the Senate’s) actions would appear to be moot anyway, as a petition had already been lodged with the court by Bruce Bell. Consequently, Culleton’s candidature (and election) would have been found to be invalid anyway.
No doubt Brandis will be up against the wall come the revolution, but the only thing that come come out of this is that Culleton will lose more money.
Another one BITES THE DUST? I TRULY WISH THIS TO BE THE CASE! THIS AG BELIEVES THAT HE IS ABOVE HE LAW.
HE PROVED THIS WITH MARK DREYFUS TANTRUM!!
NOW IS THE CHANCE FOR AUSTRALIAN POLITICIANS TO COME CLEAN AND
‘..DRAIN THE SWAMP” AS CORRUPTION IS CONTAGIOUS!!