Australia: Discrimination Hearing Settled in Favour of Falun Dafa

On Friday, 21 February 2003 - The discrimination complaint lodged by Dr. Michael Pearson-Smith on behalf of the Falun Dafa Association of Australia, following the exclusion of Falun Dafa from the Chinese New Year Festival of 2002, was resolved at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. The hearing, which began on Tuesday, concluded with a settlement that guarantees Falun Dafa participation in future festivals up to the year 2008.

The case of Australian Falun Gong practitioners vs. Federation Of Chinese Associations on discrimination, which was originally scheduled for a five-day hearing, concluded early on February 20 when the parties reached an out of court settlement. The defendant made a written pledge that the settlement guaranteed Falun Dafa's participation in future festivals for the next five years. The attorney for the plaintiff pointed out that this conciliation settlement clearly indicated it was not acceptable in Australia to discriminate against Falun Gong.

Plaintiff's Attorney (front row, first from left) and some practitioners from Melbourne.	Mr. Brown, Attorney from Holding Redlich Law Firm, accepting an interview

On the first day of the public hearing, the plaintiff's attorney Mark Irvine pointed out to the court the reason that the event organiser refused Falun Gong to participate in the celebration was their fear of offending "influential friends," referring to Beijing's influence reaching into Australia.

Plaintiff's witness Dr. Michael Pearson-Smith pointed out to the court that in the past several years, Falun Gong had participated in over 50 community celebrations in Australia and had not ever had any security problem. In another testimony, Mr. Pearson-Smith also stated that a staff member of the sponsor once said, "Should we give you a stall, next year we would not get the sponsor's contract...We are just merchants and we have to support the family."

Before testifying, the witness for the defendants first made some corrections to the written testimony he gave, including changing the date he first knew of the Falun Gong's application from February 14, 2003 to February 1st. When being questioned about his views on Falun Gong, the witness replied that he had no opinions on the matter. Then the plaintiff's attorney exhibited a document to the courtroom that stated that the Chinese Associations supported Chinese government's ban of Falun Gong.

The defendant's witness also stated that the decision of not giving Falun Gong a stall was made at an emergency meeting of Chinese Association Presidium on the afternoon of February 14th. However, the plaintiff's attorney exhibited one electronic mail, which demonstrated to the courtroom that before the meeting was convened, this witness had informed the sponsor to not give a stall to Falun Gong.

When the public hearing carried on to noon of the second day, the judge called the attorneys from both sides and expressed that although he cannot be certain that he would make a ruling advantageous for Falun Gong, from the testimony already submitted, he had enough reason to believe that political discrimination indeed existed. He suggested both sides achieve reconciliation.

On the afternoon of February 19th, attorneys of both sides separately consulted their respective litigant. The next morning, the two sides reached an out of court settlement.

The defendant provided a written letter to the plaintiff. Included in the terms of settlement are guarantees that:

The Federation Of Chinese Associations (Vic.) Inc. as an incorporated community organisation in Victoria will always abide by the requirements of the Equal Opportunity Act, including the requirement not to discriminate on the grounds of religious and political beliefs and activities.

The FCA agrees to provide Falun Dafa Association of Victoria access to a stall at the FCA Chinese New Year Festival in 2004 and in 2005-2008 if festivals are held in those years, and to permit Falun Dafa Assoc. of Vic. to participate at this above-mentioned festival under the same terms and conditions as other participants of the festival.

Dr. Pearson-Smith stated that: "This settlement is a positive outcome for all concerned. It means that Falun Dafa can take its rightful place in next year's Chinese New Year Festival. It shows that discrimination is not acceptable in Australia and that the system is working. I also feel that the Federation of Chinese Associations, as fellow Australians, will eventually realise that this result is actually in their interests as well."

Barrister Luck Brown stated to the media after the case closed, "The case clearly indicated that the Falun Gong is discriminated against because it criticised the Chinese
government's persecution policy, but the discrimination was very dangerous."