By CHRISTOPHER YATES
of CitizenGO
WHAT happens when a parliament starts deciding which believers are a threat to democracy?
We are about to find out. A parliamentary inquiry is drafting its final report on the 2025 federal election, and its interim report already describes democracy as “under assault” from third parties.
Coalition members of the committee have accused it of running a witch-hunt against a small Christian church. Church representatives testified that their members were harassed at polling booths because of their clothing, hairstyles and beliefs..
They said the same treatment aimed at any other faith would never have been tolerated. They are right.
Here is the scandal within the scandal. The AEC received 550 harassment complaints, and 144 submissions described intimidation at polling places.
Yet the law protects a doorway, and nothing more. Beyond six metres from a booth entrance, the AEC admits it has almost no power to protect anyone.
That is why volunteers were followed, filmed and shouted at, and why there were no consequences. And the proposed “cure”? Register third-party campaigners and impose an official code of conduct on political speech.
That would create a list of who is allowed to campaign and a rule book for what they are allowed to say, which would amount to the end of freedom of thought and expression in Australia. The final report is being drafted right now and is due at the end of 2026.
Once a registration scheme appears in a tabled report, it becomes the starting point for a bill, so this drafting window is our only chance to shape it.
Let me be clear about what this petition is: CitizenGO takes no position on whether the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church breached any electoral laws.
If it did, that should be established, stated clearly and penalised. We are simply insisting that a religious community be judged by the same rules as everyone else.
Of the more than eighty submissions accusing the church, only five met a proper standard of evidence. If a committee proceeds on the other seventy-five, it is endorsing suspicion and gossip, plain and simple.
Would this have been tolerated if it were directed at any other faith? A volunteer mocked for wearing a hijab would spark national outrage over bigotry. A volunteer mocked for modest dress and a Bible is treated as a punchline.
There is also a concrete, winnable fix here. Enforceable protection against harassment, obstruction, hostile filming and religious interrogation beyond the exclusion zone is a specific, achievable reform. And the church itself asked for exactly this protection, for volunteers of every faith and none.
But protection must never become registration. A speech code and a register of “approved” campaigners would restrict lawful speech in an attempt to solve a problem of unlawful conduct. We want the thug at the booth stopped, and we reject a Commonwealth register of “acceptable” citizens.
Can we actually win this? Yes, and here is why. The three Coalition senators on the committee have already dissented once and were attacked for it. A large public petition turns their courageous dissent into a constituency, giving them a reason to push harder.
The AEC has publicly admitted that its powers are inadequate. An organised group of Australians calling for booth protections gives the Commissioner exactly the cover he needs to request new authority.
And CitizenGO has taken the same free-speech position on 18C and ASIO powers. Our objection to a registration requirement for booth volunteers is based on a fundamental principle.
Picture the two possible outcomes. In one, a strong dissent rejects religious profiling, the final report recommends protections for all volunteers, and the AEC publishes clear guidance before the next election.
In the other, the report brands a religious community as a structural threat, and legislation follows. Harassment remains legal beyond six metres, while political participation requires official registration. Every faith community learns that visible engagement in the political process invites investigation.
There is hope, Leonard. But only if we act now, while the report is still being drafted.
After tabling, we would be lobbying against a settled government position. Before tabling, we can help shape that position. Every signature strengthens the dissent and puts our reform on the record.
Thank you for standing with us,
Christopher Yates and the entire team at CitizenGO
P.S. A parliamentary report could brand Christian volunteers as suspects while leaving them unprotected at the booth. Click here and sign the petition now!
