The Northern Territory Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal by a man opposed to vaccination mandates who claimed he could not be prosecuted for alleged criminal offences because the law does not apply to a "sovereign tribal man" like himself.
David Alan Cole is facing multiple charges dating back over the past two years, including contravening a Chief Health Officer's direction, assaulting a police officer, taking part in a riot, entering Aboriginal land without a permit and breaching bail conditions.
When the proceedings went before the Darwin Local Court last year, Mr Cole, who is Indigenous, argued he was being prosecuted under a legal system that was not valid.
"[His] contention was that the Australian Constitution [and] the laws of the Commonwealth and the laws of the Northern Territory have no application to him as a 'sovereign tribal man'," Chief Justice Michael Grant said a decision handed down last week.
"The appellant asserts that, as a consequence, the Local Court has no jurisdiction or power to hear and determine the charges which have been brought against him."
Following a two-day hearing in the Local Court late last year, Judge David Woodroffe made a ruling in relation to the "preliminary issue" raised by Mr Cole.
"Judge Woodroffe determined that he was bound by authorities from the High Court to [the Supreme] Court to the effect that Indigenous Australians are subject to the laws of the Commonwealth, and the laws of the States and Territories in which they reside," the Chief Justice Grant stated.
Mr Cole subsequently appealed to the Supreme Court, claiming Judge Woodroffe's decision was contrary to other High Court decisions and was inconsistent with the United Nation's Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
However, based on "preliminary observation" of the cited High Court decisions, Chief Justice Grant said there appeared to be "insurmountable barriers" to Mr Cole's contentions.
He said there was nothing in the High Court's previous decisions "which would support the notion that Australian legislatures lack competence to regulate the rights of Aboriginal people".
He also said there was nothing to validate the notion that "the laws enacted by those legislatures are subject to the acceptance, adoption, request or consent of an Aboriginal person to which they would otherwise have application."
Despite the Chief Justice's observations, he said it was not necessary for him to a make a ruling on Mr Cole's arguments.
He said this was because Judge Woodroffe's determination related to a "preliminary issue" that could not be appealed in the Supreme Court.
"The right of appeal lies only from an order determining the subject matter of the complaint; that is, from a final and not from an interlocutory order," he stated.
"The appeals presently before this Court are from a ruling of the Local Court which is properly characterised as an interlocutory order.
"It did not finally determine the criminal proceedings, or the rights of the parties in the criminal proceedings.
"Accordingly, they are not appeals from a 'conviction, order, or adjudication' of the Court in the relevant and necessary sense."
Mr Cole's matters are due to return to the Darwin Local Court later this month.
He told the court he would try to challenge the decision in the High Court.
