South Australian MP Fraser Ellis cannot “shake the magic wand” of parliamentary privilege to avoid prosecution for allegedly dishonest travel compensation claims, prosecutors have told Adelaide Magistrates’ Court.
Key points:
- Independent MP Fraser Ellis is accused of making more than $ 18,000 in fraudulent spending claims
- He flatly denies the allegations
- The court heard the allegations today about what evidence will be admissible
Mr Ellis was charged with 23 counts of fraud last February for his alleged misuse of the country’s housing allowance, following an investigation by the Independent Commissioner against Corruption (ICAC).
The Narungga member is accused of making 78 fraudulent claims for the benefit, totaling more than $ 18,000, between May 13, 2018 and June 12, 2020.
Ellis flatly denies the allegations.
His lawyers have asked the court to find that he is immune from being prosecuted because travel claims were subject to “absolute protection of parliamentary privilege” after they were tabled in Parliament during a heated debate in 2020.
His lawyer, Tom Duggan, told the court that the claim for parliamentary privileges was embedded in the Bill of Rights, which dates back to seventeenth-century England.
He was born during a turbulent time in history under King Charles I, whose authoritarian government broke the monarchy’s relationship with Parliament and led to a civil war, which led to his execution by beheading.
“In these difficult times between the monarch and the House of Commons, the bill of rights came out,” Duggan told the court.
“It is these concepts of freedom of expression and freedom of debate that ultimately led to the entry into force of the Bill of Rights. Therefore, it is these high principles that we seek to trust today.”
Duggan said that once the document was presented to parliament, it became “unavailable for evidence” and the prosecution could not be trusted in the case.
“This document has been tabled, not only was it presented, but it formed the basis of the notice of motion … it became a matter of parliament because of the control that Mr. Malinauskas wanted to apply in relation to in the forms, which got bipartisan support. “He said.
Fraser Ellis and his lawyer after their first court appearance last year. (ABC News: Claire Campbell)
“It’s not a cloak, it’s not a magic wand”
Prosecutor Ryan Williams said presenting the documents in court would not harm parliamentary operations.
“According to my presentation, parliamentary privilege shouldn’t dazzle the court, it’s not a cloak, it’s not a magic wand,” Williams said.
“What my scholarly friend (Mr. Ellis’ lawyer) intends to do … is shake the wand of parliamentary privilege or try to throw the cloak so that parliamentary privilege protects all these thousands of claim forms that were presented to parliament because they could not be admissible in any proceedings.
“In my opinion, this is, with respect, a misinterpretation of the scope of parliamentary privilege, its purposes and consequences.”
Williams said the prosecution’s case was simply that Ellis did not stay in Adelaide on the dates he claimed the benefits.
“Mr Ellis’ s forms were not discussed, questioned or determined in the course [parliamentary] procedures, “he said.
Lawyers also debated what parallels could be drawn from a UK case involving three former MPs charged with being tried on false accounting charges while members of parliament.
In this case, the court ruled that the deputies’ expense claims did not attract parliamentary privilege.
Magistrate Simon Smart will hand down his sentence in August, less than three weeks before Ellis is tried.