Clive Palmer has claimed that his political power led to criminal charges as he sought to adjourn a long-running case alleging he used company funds to benefit his party.
The mining magnate faced Brisbane Magistrates Court on Monday for a mention of charges of fraud and dishonest behaviour as a company director brought by Australia’s financial watchdog in 2020.
Australian Securities and Investments Commission alleges Mr Palmer transferred more than $12.1 million from a Mineralogy bank account to benefit his political party or other Palmer companies in the lead-up to the 2013 federal election.
The funds were moved contrary to the purpose for which the funds were being held, the commission alleges.
Mr Palmer was elected as the Palmer United Party MP for Fairfax in that election, with another three candidates elected to the Senate.
The one-term MP on Monday represented himself in court, seeking to adjourn the matter until after he brought it before the Court of Appeal in four weeks.
“An email disclosed … stated there was ‘significant ongoing media or political interest in Mr Palmer and arguably strong reasons to take actions against him and it may send a strong message to other people’,” Mr Palmer told magistrate Cameron McKenzie.
“I don’t think I should have been charged for something because of my media interest or my political beliefs.”
Mr Palmer said it “reflects badly” on government agencies that he was the leader of a political party that held the Senate balance of power when potential charges against him were being discussed.
The magistrate heard Mr Palmer intended to file further claims of human rights violations before the United Nations.
Commonwealth prosecutor Dane Marley sought for the court to designate time for hearings on four applications and a tentative date for a committal hearing.
“Mr Palmer sought a declaration that these proceedings not be advanced until the court determined the human rights appeal, which was dismissed,” Mr Marley said.
“It provides some useful guidance to this court that it should not adjourn these matters pending that court’s determination of the human rights.”
Mr McKenzie said he would adjourn the matter until October 23 but the parties had to discuss which applications to bring forward to progress the case.
Mr Palmer said outside court he had represented himself due to his solicitor’s unavoidable absence.
“I enjoy it, especially when you are winning and you are telling people the truth,” he said.
