R v Anning [2013] QCA 263

R v Anning [2013] QCA 263 was an appeal from a conviction on a single count of unlawful use of a motor vehicle. In the appellants submissions was a document entitled Notice of Rebuttal of Claim to Title to Land and Claim of Right, which asserted that the state of Queensland had no power to legislate in respect of the Yidindji tribe and that, as a Yidindji tribal man, the appellant was not subject to Queensland laws.

There was also a declaration he did not consent for the matter to be heard in any court: “No invitation to attend any other court will be accepted.  No legal jurisdiction other than Yidindji Tribal Council of Elders Court or Common Law will be recognised or understood.” Further, the document referred to the Queensland Government being registered in Washington DC and asserted that “Private Natural People are NOT within the Corporation Seal of the Queensland Government and the Queensland Government Copyright.”

The court referred to the relevant decisions of the High Court, including: Coe v Commonwealth (1993) 68 ALJR 110, Coe v Commonwealth of Australia (1979) 24 ALR 118, Mabo v Queensland (No 2) (1992) 175 CLR 1, Thorpe v Commonwealth (No 3) (1997) 71 ALJR 767, Walker v The State of New South Wales (1994) 182 CLR 45 and Members of the Yorta Yorta Aboriginal Community v State of Victoria (2002) 214 CLR 422

“Thus, insofar as the appellant contends that the Yidindji Tribe has sovereignty over its part of Queensland to the exclusion of the State of Queensland, or that he is beyond the reach of Queensland’s criminal law, those issues have long since been determined against him.  There is no substance in the points raised.”

Click to access r-v-anning-2013-qca-263.pdf

Leave a Reply