Media release: Decision reserved in Data Access Order trial after WA police admit raid for "potential future offences"
It came after a detective from the State Security Investigations Group, WA's counter-terror police, admitted under cross-examination that WA police raided Ms Partyka's home and seized her electronic devices in relation to "potential future offences" that had not occurred.
Ms Partyka has never been charged with any offences in relation to the raid and device seizures - except for refusing to comply with police demands she give access to her devices due to suspicion of a conspiracy to commit an unspecified offence.
In her closing submissions, Ms Partyka's barrister Zarah Burgess characterised the WA police investigation as "a somewhat Orwellian notion of this potential future crime."
"The unlawful seizure (of Ms Partyka's devices) has sparked an era of troubling policing of what we would characterise as peaceful climate protestors," Ms Burgess submitted. "These data access orders continue to be issued in relation to ongoing raids and seizures."
Ms Partyka's primary defence in today's trial was that the Data Access Orders issued by Deputy Chief Magistrate Woods in March this year was unlawful as the search warrant WA police relied on to seize Ms Partyka's devices failed to state with sufficient particularity what offence it pertained to.
The secondary defence relied on was that Mr Partyka had a reasonable excuse for failing to comply with the orders due to her contractual obligations to her employers the Australian Greens and Senator Jordon Steele-John, which prevented her from providing WA police with access to confidential material, some of which is protected by Parliamentary privilege.
Magistrate Maugham will hand down his decision with written reasons on November 20. Ms Partyka faces a potential sentence of 10 years imprisonment if found Guilty.