Undermining sovereignty unity to get at colonial compensation treasure?

Ballina, NSW, July 10, 2012

Michael Anderson
40th Aboriginal Tent Embassy
Canberra February 2012

I was prepared for a government assault on the movement with chosen Aboriginal collaborators, but not from a group of people who are purporting to be the shared drivers of the sovereignty movement in concert with the organic movement that is sweeping this country.

It is alarming that Mark McMurtrie and his Original Sovereign Tribal Federation is travelling throughout the country denouncing the Interim Sovereign Union, National Unity Government movement.

The National Unity Government’s fight is against the invader state of Australia and their state colonies, not our own kind. This sovereignty movement is not about a measuring competition, it is about fighting a fight for our inherent rights as the true sovereign people of the soil. This movement is about unifying our people, not continuing division. Division only serves the interest of the state.

My concern with the Original Sovereign Tribal Federation is that it is led by Mark McMurtrie who was the whistle blower on paedophilia in New South Wales, when he made a number of allegations.

Mr McMurtrie’s advice to the former State Member of Parliament, Franka Arena, saw her raise the allegations in the State parliament of New South Wales. Mr McMurtrie failed to back up the allegation with credible evidence. As a consequence of this, Mr. McMurtrie lost everything that he ever owned and was publicly disgraced. I am afraid that Mr McMurtrie is now using the Aboriginal sovereignty movement to carry out a personal vendetta against the whole of the Australian state.

Moreover, my other concern is that he has been advised by a legal official who is a life member of the Lincoln’s Inn in London. His other confidante is a knight of the British Commonwealth Sir John Walsh of Brannagh. Having learnt this, I am concerned about the integrity of the Original Sovereign Tribal Federation objectives.

At a recent weekend retreat that I attended with Mr McMurtrie and others, I met his personal advisors who have been working with him for the past 8 years. I have in the past applauded Mr McMurtrie’s legal efforts in challenging the jurisdiction of the State to prosecute our people. For him now to go around this country knowingly undermining and creating division within the Aboriginal communities amounts to treason against the very people with whom he seeks to work and wishes to represent. The fact that he has the backing of some very wealthy non-Aboriginal people makes it possible for him to move around the country unrestrained, creating a major challenge for the National Unity Government’s efforts to bring about the national unity that we all aspire to achieve.

During the weekend retreat Mr McMurtrie gave me the impression that he sought to work together to unify our people across this country but it appears the contrary is occurring. I was alarmed and concerned when I was advised that Mr McMurtrie said that he did not come to the Wollongong meeting because he was not issued with a written invitation. My legal advice suggests that Mr McMurtrie’s intention to only come to the Wollongong meeting by way of a written invitation was only to validate in writing the recognition of his Original Sovereign Tribal Federation.

My other concern is that we have now completed our own research on Mr McMurtrie’s legal advisers. The conclusions suggest that Mr McMurtrie’s most senior adviser is Mr Jerry Prus. Mr Prus is a former British prosecutor and a life member of the Lincoln’s Inn in London. Mr Prus is also a silent radical who seeks to unite Indigenous Prussians and fight for the re-instatement of the original Prussian state in Europe in country now known as Poland. The second of Mr McMurtrie’s legal team is Sir John Walsh of Brannagh who operates from Norfolk Island and practices law on the mainland. Sir John Walsh is not the most likely of persons who would seek to deliberately rock the political boat against Crown interests in Australia. In fact Sir John Walsh and Mr. Prus advised Mr McMurtrie that known Aboriginal people must be included in the leadership of the Aboriginal sovereignty movement.

Other significant advisors to Mark McMurtrie are former staff members of the former conservative Prime Minister of Australia, Mr Malcolm Fraser. It may be a dream team, but as an Aboriginal person I find the Original Sovereign Tribal Federation is being steered down a road that will only serve to further entrench the authority of the invader state over our people’s interests and inherent rights.

Another significant concern is knowing that Mr McMurtrie’s intention while travelling around Australia is to get Aboriginal people to sign an agreement that provides himself with the power to represent Aboriginal people and their respective Nations’ interests. His ambition is, once he signs up the people, to then go to England with these signatures with the set objective to go after a Compensation and Restitution package from the English as a trade for the de-colonisation of Australia, but this may come at a very big price for our people if it is not done right.

Another move by Mark McMurtrie in the past 8 years has been somewhat deceitful in that he went to central Australia and got himself initiated into the Walpiri law in order to gain a tribal name and association. Having achieved this, he now argues that he has the authority of the ancient lore/law of the Aboriginal people which permits him to represent the elders of the law.

In this NAIDOC Week it appears that we have reached a three way cross road in Aboriginal politics. Aboriginal people, it seems, are being asked to choose between different pathways forwards. Assimilation/Integration through the signing of Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUA’s). That is, giving up your land and power of attorney of all that is yours as a sovereign people for less than 3% of the natural wealth that our people are entitled to. Moreover, the people with whom these ILUA’s are signed may not personally see or gain any significant benefit in the short term. If they do, what they get now is the end. It may be that their grandchildren or great grandchildren may gain some small benefit in the future. I can say that signing ILUA’s that recognise your nations as the ancient owners of land that are national parks and reserves is all show with no real meaning and purpose other than to have our people sign lands back to the State in perpetuity. This is not gaining full and outright ownership for our people. It is a deceitful method to gain ownership under your signature in favour if the invader state. This deceit then allows the federal government and their leaders to show to the world, look what we do for our Aboriginal people.

The National Congress of Australia’s First Nations people is a federal government sponsored organisation that represents Australia’s iconic Aboriginal body thus, falsely representing to the world that Australia has a black parliament who ‘ADVISES’ the governments on policies and policy directions for Australia’s Aboriginal people. A pity they failed to adhere to their advice on the ‘stronger futures’ legislation.

Then there is the ambition of the Original Sovereign Tribal Federation that seeks to have Aboriginal people sign over power of attorney to them and their leadership that includes non-Aborigines in order for them to be the Aboriginal representatives here in Australia and overseas on the sovereignty question while attempting to negotiate in England on our peoples’ behalf for a compensation and restitution package which they plan to administer on our peoples’ behalf if successful.

The Sovereign Union National Unity Government are attempting to unite our people into a national representative government without any directions, influence or control in our affairs by the invader states. We must take responsibility and ownership of our affairs by establishing local, regional and national governance. Furthermore, we must establish our own International profile as a united national government asserting our independent sovereign identity.

Only by showing that we have a population who have the appropriate capacity to govern, have our own laws, religion and the ability to establish our own economics to build our own infrastructure for our people, can we expect to be taken seriously as a people.

To permit ourselves to be divided is to lose. To be put into a position where we have to make choices in respect to ways forward for our people is a definite danger sign. To fail to unite will be a disaster for future generations and the invader state will be the only winners.