Internal documents from the Australian Federal Police (AFP) reveal the agency sounded the alarm about sovereign citizens’ “violence, fixation and harassment” in the months leading up to last year’s shooting in Wieambilla, Queensland.
In February last year, the AFP’s acting assistant commissioner, counter-terrorism & special investigations Stephen Dametto briefed a private online roundtable about sovereign citizens, a very loose group of extremists whose anti-government ideology is based on incorrect, pseudo-legal interpretations that delegitimise the Australian legal system and its institutions.
Via a freedom of information request, Crikey obtained notes and the presentation from the AFP briefing, giving new insight into the force’s views on the sovereign citizens movement, its behaviours, and the likelihood of its adherents being involved in violence. The AFP declined to comment on the documents.
Crikey Australian Federal Police sovereign citizen briefing by Cam Wilson on Scribd
Dametto’s briefing highlighted sovereign citizens’ “underlying capacity to inspire violence”, but noted that the movement is often said to be non-violent.
“Unlike some other extremist groups who inherently advocate violence as part of their beliefs, SovCits see violence as a last resort or only necessary in the form of ‘self-defence’ against a tyrannical government. This, however, does not mean that these groups can’t be dangerous,” the brief’s speaking notes read.
One roundtable attendee, who Crikey has granted anonymity as they agreed to Chatham House rules when they agreed to participate in the session, felt that the briefing downplayed the normalisation of violent rhetoric and the resultant risk of violence in sovereign citizen online groups. However, Crikey understands that the briefing was intended to promote the discussion of issues in the space rather than a detailed threat assessment.
The briefing also lays out what the AFP has identified as characteristics of a sovereign citizen movement in Australia. They include:
- “Idiosyncratic” interpretations of common law, human rights laws and historical legal documents such as the Magna Carta, which are used as grounds for typical rhetoric like “I do not consent”.
- A “confidence” about their legal and moral justification for their beliefs.
- The use of social media and messaging apps. The briefing notes that these groups typically organise on public, mainstream platforms like Facebook and YouTube, but have migrated to platforms like Telegram after being deplatformed.
- An overlap with other extremist groups such as anti-vaccine, conspiracy and far-right groups.
- “Information sharing, encouragement and support, including financial support” with international sovereign citizen groups.
The briefing also states that Australia’s sovereign citizen movement has seen a resurgence that has been “significantly shaped by the government response to the COVID-19 pandemic”.
The roundtable, which was first reported by Guardian Australia, came months before the Queensland shooting which saw Nathaniel, Gareth and Stacey Train kill two police and a neighbour.
While the attack was classified by Queensland Police and the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) as “religiously motivated” by Christian extremism, the perpetrators’ online history shows that they were at least influenced by sovereign citizen ideas. In the years leading up to the attack, accounts under Gareth Train’s name interacted with prominent Australian sovereign citizen figures and websites.
Lowy Institute research fellow on transnational challenges and extremism Lydia Khalil said that it’s clear the Trains were influenced by other anti-government beliefs and ideas in addition to premillennial Christian views.
“It’s complicated, so I think categorisations are not particularly accurate because people can be motivated by multiple things,” she told Crikey.
ASIO chief Mike Burgess briefed the national cabinet on the sovereign citizen movement in February this year and later warned during his annual threat assessment that his agency was monitoring “angry and isolated Australians” radicalised during the pandemic.
Many thanks for that most interesting report, Cam. You obviously spent some considerable time carefully researching it.
I have felt for some time, especially since the height of the COVID crisis, that this mob of ‘sovereign citizen’ maniacs (let’s call a ‘spade a spade’) are a major worry. As far as I am concerned having this sort of movement in our midst is tantamount to having a cancer in our bodies. As is indicated in the AFP notes, some of those ‘cancer’ cells are rather benign but others, as the Wieambilla shooting shows, are extremely malignant.
It is up to the politicians and the police (at both the state and federal level) to crack down relentlessly and without mercy on this dangerous and potentially murderous group in our midst. Of course, if such a crackdown was to take place (and I have grave doubts that the relevant authorities have sufficient courage or determination to take the required action) then there will be cries of “human rights abrogations”, “loss of freedoms” etc. from the usual suspects who typically make excuses for all sorts of criminal behavior; and who are also more concerned for the ‘rights’ of the criminals rather than those of those of their victims.
Just on that very point Cam, I notice that early on in your report you (quite correctly) highlight the fact that the police had been made aware in the months prior to the Wieambilla incident of the dangers posed by this group of maniacs. The unstated implication being, “Why were proactive steps not taken to deal with these people?” The answer to that question is no doubt complex and multi-faceted. However, as the police in other places who have to deal with other serious ‘social problems’ have discovered, if you want to keep your job and avoid social opprobrium then you had better ‘keep your head down, your backside up and look a bit silly’ and just do your basic job; and in doing so, take care to avoid controversy (or upsetting the ‘wokeys’).
These ‘sovereign citizen’ people must be dealt with in the same way as outlaw motorcycle gangs should be. They have the potential to cause major disruption, not to mention murder and mayhem, in our society.
Agree to an extent, simply flabbergasted how these extreme group avoid scrutiny and being held to account over time when red flags everywhere?
One would argue they are implicit in the themes promoted by RW media and think tanks inc. ‘freedom & liberty’, ‘freedom of speech’, ‘freedom of worship’, anti-Covid/Vaxxer ‘Freedom Rallies’ etc.; all US imports to indirectly support white nativist fringe dwellers who may vote to the right, and are not ‘woke’.
Interesting, but police presume this movement is organic?
However, from another angle including ‘intelligence’ how far do police, policy makers and govt. have their heads in the sand or down rabbit holes that they avoid and miss what is well known elsewhere?
Sovereign citizens are part of the alt right and conspiracy driven believers, encouraged by fringe media and influencers, but well known in the US; SPLC had warned of these types over decade ago:
‘Sovereign citizens believe they are not under the jurisdiction of the federal government and consider themselves exempt from U.S. law. They use a variety of conspiracy theories and falsehoods to justify their beliefs and their activities, some of which are illegal and violent.’
This information and ‘architecture of influence’ is in the public domain, like the US population bomb greenwashers who dog whistle immigrants, Evangelicals, ‘free speech’ anti-LGBT & anti-woke etc.; totally missed in Australia?
This group is sustained by social media and their own very loud and getting louder government conspiracies echo chambers.
I am unsure that the decision to allow the people who occupied and desecrated the Shrine of Remembrance during the last of the big Freedumb movement rallies to simply walk away, rather than take a lot of photos, identify each and everyone of them and arrest them later.
I really doubt that most Alt-Right aka facists would defend their desecration of a shrine to our war dead.
I think some would defend desecration of a shrine to feed their collective narcissism for more notoriety.
We continue to pay billions of taxpayer dollars to militarise our various police forces across Australia. Are we any safer. Yeah nah…remember Man Monis
Social media companies are making a motza- we live in a highly regulated society- these companies should be independently audited for their moderation capacity and called to account of they are not managing content. We have an enormous raft of Australian Standards that many of us have to comply with—- plus a myriad of other regs. I’m tired of these companies working outside these parameters that create a safer environment for Australians.
Highly pertinent comment.
The Federal Government’s acquiescence to the Sovereign Citizen / Freedumb movement has resulted in 20,000 excess deaths from Covid19.
How frightened are they AFP of trying to bring the most dangerous and insidious terrorist organizations under control?
From the actions taken so far, very frightened.
Words like “End to Covid exceptionalism” sound logical and yet, all it is state and federal governments trying to avoid giving these nut jobs like “Karen demands entry into Bunnings” a rallying point.
The same AFP that raided the ABC cause the government didn’t like the 4 Corners report on Afghanistan war crimes committed by Australian soldiers. The AFP needs to be rebuilt, or disbanded and recreated. It is not to be a tool of the government.