New South Wales police are yet to withdraw a charge against pro-Palestine protester Hannah Thomas that relied on a rarely used emergency power introduced in the wake of the 2005 Cronulla riots.
Thomas was arrested and charged alongside four others at a pro-Palestine protest in Sydney on 27 June that was attended by about 60 people at SEC Plating. The 35-year-old was taken to hospital, with her lawyers alleging a police officer punched her in the face. Last week Thomas underwent a second round of surgery amid fears she could lose sight in her right eye.
The former Greens candidate had her matter briefly heard in Bankstown local court on Tuesday, where her solicitor Stewart O’Connell said Thomas would plead not guilty to three charges: resisting police, failure to comply with a move on direction, and refusing or failing to comply with a direction to disperse.
The last charge is yet to be withdrawn, despite the assistant commissioner Brett McFadden saying last week it would be.
McFadden said in a statement last week after he launched a review to examine whether the charges against Thomas were relevant and appropriate, that the latter charge – which falls under laws used to quell “large-scale public disorders” and which were introduced in the wake of the Cronulla riots – would be dropped. He said Thomas would instead face a charge of failing to comply with a move on direction.
However, on Tuesday the court heard Thomas was facing all three charges, and the prosecutor Chris Allison said none had been withdrawn yet.
Allison, who is a solicitor for the NSW Director of Public Prosecutions, told the court on Tuesday the DPP had taken over Thomas’ matter from police.
On Monday, in a statement calling for charges against Thomas to be withdrawn, Thomas’s lawyers at O’Brien Criminal and Civil Solicitors alleged that a police officer punched her in the face during the protest, resulting in “extensive and serious injury to her eye”.
Her lawyers said they had taken the unusual step of commenting on the case while criminal proceedings against their client were under way after viewing the police’s body cam footage.
They flagged that Thomas will sue the state of New South Wales “for the actions of the NSW police officers connected to her apprehension, injury, detention, and prosecution”.
Days after Thomas’s arrest, McFadden told ABC radio that he had viewed the body-worn video and there was “no information at this stage that’s before me that indicates any misconduct on behalf of my officers”.
Thomas’ arrest has been declared a critical incident by police, which means an investigation into the incident will be overseen by the independent police watchdog.
Protesters claimed SEC Plating, at where the 27 June protest took place, was manufacturing parts used in the F-35 jet program. However, SEC Plating has denied that this is the case.
The four protesters who were charged alongside Thomas also had their matters heard on Tuesday in Bankstown. All pleaded not guilty to their various charges relating to the protest and their arrests.
This included Zack Schofield, 26, who is facing a charge of failing to comply with a police direction, and resisting police. On Tuesday he had a bail condition removed that had restricted him from attending protests.
O’Connell, a lawyer at O’Brien Criminal and Civil Solicitors, who is acting on behalf of all five protesters, told the court during Schofield’s bail variation hearing that: “There’s no objective evidence which I have seen which clearly shows he resisted.”
“We say that [direction from police] is clearly unlawful.”
Outside the court on Tuesday, O’Connell said: “Every minute that these charges persist is another minute of injustice”.
“The charges are ludicrous. There is objective evidence in relation to all of the matters that are consistent with innocence,” he said.
“Hannah Thomas, in the meantime, she’ll be doing everything she possibly can to bring accountability to the NSW police and to receive justice.”
O’Connell alleged that the body-worn video depicted “a brutal, cowardly and despicable assault”.
