A self-represented man, accused of involvement in lighting a destructive fire at Old Parliament House, told jurors they have "the ability to make a decision about what is right, as opposed to what is lawful".
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
"Because what is lawful has made a significant impact on our people," Bruce Shillingsworth jnr said at the start of an ACT Supreme Court trial on Thursday.
Justice David Mossop instructed the jury to "reach your verdicts in accordance to the legal directions of the case".
"Your obligation is to comply with my directions about the law, whether or not you think the law is good," he told jurors.
Shillingsworth and co-accused Nicholas Malcolm Reed are on trial over a fire that was allegedly lit deliberately at Old Parliament House, during protests, on December 30, 2021.
Reed, accused of being the principal offender and represented by barrister James Sabharwal, has pleaded not guilty to arson.
Shillingsworth, an Aboriginal man who is representing himself, previously pleaded not guilty to aiding and abetting arson.
In her opening address, prosecutor Soraya Saikal-Skea told the jury CCTV and police body-worn camera footage formed the basis of the prosecution case.
She said the footage showed a man alleged to be Reed carrying hot coals and sticks from a nearby smoking ceremony and placing them near the front doors, called the portico, of Old Parliament House.
Ms Saikal-Skea claimed as "smoke starts to billow from the area of the front doors", Shillingsworth could be seen gesturing for protesters to form a "horseshoe" shape around the fire.
"The doors were obscured by the bodies of protesters," she said.
"A group of protesters and police clashed at the steps."
Police retreated and the "fire eventually engulfed the portico area", which caused "extensive damage", Ms Saikal-Skea told the jury.
She also accused Shillingsworth of preventing police from putting out the fire and involvement in covering two security cameras with white paint, concealing their view of the front doors.
Wearing a kangaroo skin and a feathered headdress, Shillingsworth spoke to the jury.
He said Old Parliament House was "a significant symbol" and linked the building to policies of genocide and dispossession.
"They might be nice words to use but we experienced that," he said.
"Ladies and gentlemen, as a jury, you have the ability to make a decision about what is right, as opposed to what is lawful.
"Because what is lawful has made a significant impact on our people."
Shillingsworth claimed the prosecutor was "painting the picture of an angry First Nations mob".
"We are not angry ... we are fighting," he said.
READ ALSO:
He argued the group was undertaking cultural ceremonies, which "are not to be seen" by non-Indigenous people, on the day in question.
Mr Sabharwal told the jury identification was the main issue for his client.
The trial continues.
Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content:
- Bookmark canberratimes.com.au
- Download our app
- Make sure you are signed up for our breaking and regular headlines newsletters
- Follow us on Twitter
- Follow us on Instagram
