If Moreland’s electoral fraud fiasco wasn’t dramatic enough, Robert Richter, QC has been added to the mix.
To recap, in November 2020, the Moreland Council election results were brought into disrepute due to allegations of electoral fraud in the North-West ward. Irregularities were detected when a number of voters complained that they had not received their ballot papers.It was later alleged that a candidate had offered $500 for every 50 ballot papers.
In response to these concerns, the VEC made an application to VCAT within its strict 14 day time frame – as per the Local Government Act 2020 (Vic) – to contest the election results. Under this Act, VCAT has broad powers to resolve the matter in dispute, including declaring an election void or imposing financial penalties.
Incredibly, despite the VCAT matter being initiated in November 2020, the matter is still ongoing.
The VEC’s initial submission to VCAT was that the North-West ward results should be invalidated due to the suspected fraudulent ballot papers that were detected when counting was being undertaken. 17 candidates in the election have also been listed as additional parties to the proceedings.
The current complicating factor is that a criminal investigation is being conducted parallel to the VCAT matter. As such, the full-extent of the alleged fraud is largely unknown as the suspected fraudulent ballot papers are being held by Victoria Police.
The VEC has recently taken a backstep from its initial position, believing that, based on the evidence available, the fraud would not have been substantial enough to sway the results of the election.
On the other hand, North-West ward Councillors, Cnr Angelica Panopoulos, Cnr Helen Davidson and Cnr Oscar Yildiz have engaged barristers to bolster the position that an appropriate decision should still be arrived at by VCAT, and that the decision should be based on the full extent of available evidence. Submissions were made on this point at the latest hearing in August, with barristers for the aforementioned Councillors requesting that VCAT order Victoria Police to show evidence of the 83 suspect ballot papers.
Making submissions against this position is Cnr Milad El-Halabi, who has recently engaged Robert Richter. Richter is a high-profile, extremely expensive and oft-times controversial figure in the Australian legal landscape, well-known for his defence of Cardinal George Pell and most recently his defence of Witness K.
Richter argued at the August hearing that an order requesting those ballot papers be presented as evidence should not be granted, as any findings made by VCAT – which applies civil standards to its findings (‘on the balance of probabilities’) rather than criminal standards (‘beyond reasonable doubt’) – may jeopardise the ongoing criminal hearing.
In response to this concern are arguments about the sanctity of democracy. What is more in the public interest: one person facing custody, or a municipality having a democratically elected council? Given the high stakes of this electoral scandal (and Richter’s daily costs) we would imagine everyone is keen to have this over and done with.
By SAS & BB
The Coburg Meddler 