The ‘sovereign citizen’ movement is growing. So is the risk of more violence
- Written by Josh Roose, Associate Professor of Politics, Deakin University
Australia has watched on as authorities have searched for Dezi Freeman, a so-called “sovereign citizen[1]” accused of killing two police officers in the regional Victorian town of Porepunkah.
The case has put the spotlight on the sovereign citizen[2], or “sovcit”, movement and its extreme, often conspiratorial, anti-government ideology.
It would be easy to see the incident as an isolated one: a case of a radicalised man enacting his fringe beliefs and allegedly taking two innocent lives in the process.
But this case is emblematic of a broader problem. The sovereign citizen movement is growing, as demonstrated by an increase in the presence of “sovereign citizens” before the courts[3]. Australia is likely to see more violence fuelled by this ideology unless some of the underlying drivers are addressed.
A growing movement
The sovereign citizen movement has been in Australia for decades. It can be traced back to the late 1960s and early 1970s, when the movement was emerging[4] in the United States.
One of the first famous examples was “Prince Leonard”, who founded[5] Hutt River Province in Western Australia. Leonard Casey started his own “micronation” following a stoush with the WA government over wheat production quotas.
It was the first of many so-called micronations to come. There are now dozens[6], if not hundreds of them across the country. Some estimates[7] suggest a third of all “micronations” globally are in Australia.
Despite not having any legal standing, the people who run these micronations think of them as stand-alone countries with their own flags, rules, currencies and passports.
But for much of the 20th century, these sovereign citizens were largely happy to live off-the-grid, in isolation.
Then when COVID struck, more people began turning to the movement, joining mostly in online forums.
Facebook sovereign citizen movement My Place[8] now has around 25,000 active members across different local groups. Many members[9] oppose vaccination, 5G and don’t believe governments or their institutions are valid.
As the movement has grown, so too have efforts to capitalise on it. Groups such as Know Your Rights[10] sell courses and advice to help people rebut the validity of fines or court actions.
A metaphorical war turned literal
In isolation, sovereign citizens could be considered bizarre but benign.
But violence is inherent to the movement[11], both here and overseas. Sovereign citizens often feel deeply humiliated, which becomes explosive anger, hatred and frustration towards all arms of government.
Sovereign citizens very often arm themselves in preparation for their “war on government”, with deadly consequences[12].
In Australia, there have been violent incidents, particularly in outer-suburban and regional areas.
In 2023, a man in Lithgow, New South Wales, who fired a gun[13] at police, was believed to be a sovereign citizen.
Read more: Why are police a target for sovereign citizen violence?[14]
During the pandemic, some sovereign citizens said mask mandates didn’t apply to them, sometimes assaulting police[15] in angry confrontations.
In other instances, sovereign citizens have attempted to arrest police officers[16] and politicans[17].
At their core, sovereign citizens believe the government is a corporation that’s using legal fiction to enslave innocent people. This makes violence towards government and police almost inevitable.
There’s also the strong likelihood of copycat acts following Freeman’s alleged actions.
This happened following Brenton Tarrant’s attack on the Al Noor Mosque in Christchurch in 2019. After that, plots and attacks in the United States[18], Norway[19], Singapore[20] and elsewhere were all inspired by Tarrant’s manifesto, a phenomenon often referred to as “stochastic terrorism[21]”.
What makes people this way?
A big reason people are attracted to sovereign citizen ideology is because of rapidly increasing regional inequality[22] in recent years.
In many small towns across Australia, young people feel they must leave[23] to pursue further education and careers, decimating the town’s population and workforce.
Housing cost is also a driver, particularly with the proliferation of short-stay accommodation. People often can’t afford[24] to buy a home in the place where they grew up.
So while there are a lot of very proud, thriving regional centres, there are many that are struggling. This creates fertile ground, particularly for older people[25], to find alternative belief systems.
These socioeconomic factors can also interact with individual circumstances[26], such as negative childhood experiences and “trigger events” like divorce or job loss.
Being a sovereign citizen gives people the ability to avoid responsibilities, such as tax and road rules. But more importantly, it offers a sense of empowerment and control.
It also offers belonging, particularly online, where people encounter others who are going through similar experiences.
The sovereign citizen ideology does for many what government can’t: reach desperate people and make them feel seen and heard.
‘Angry and alienated Australians’
Police and intelligence organisations are acutely aware of the risks sovereign citizens pose.
In his 2022 annual threat assessment[27], ASIO Director-General Mike Burgess pointed directly to sovereign citizens and the then-recent protests[28] at Old Parliament House to explain the organisation’s focus on “a small number of angry and alienated Australians”.
The Australian Federal Police have also had internal briefings[29] on the movement.
The courts encounter sovereign citizens and their pseudolaw[30] with increasing regularity. This ranges from nuisance arguments that create further backlogs[31] in the system, to people (including Freeman) attempting to arrest magistrates[32].
Read more: What does Australian law have to say about sovereign citizens and 'pseudolaw'?[33]
But responding to sovereign citizens, who vehemently reject law enforcement authority, is a massive challenge[34].
This extends to any government worker who needs to set foot on, or even near a property belonging to a sovereign citizen, whether that’s to trim a council-owned tree or check a water meter.
Addressing inequality
Sovereign citizens are an explosive, violent movement. Dealing with them requires a great deal of caution.
All levels of government need to be extremely careful, especially around property, which is sacrosanct for sovereign citizens.
The fix is not short and it’s not easy. It requires deep engagement and investment in regions to build better lives for the people who live there.
This may mean creating more capacity to work from home so people building their careers don’t have to move to bigger centres.
It could also be greater investment in regional universities to make further education closer to home.
It means addressing housing affordability and increasing social services, particularly through services such as legal aid[35], which can help deal with issues of access before individuals turn to sovereign citizen pseudolegal faux solutions.
While ever these factors remain unaddressed, we’ll likely see the sovereign citizen movement continue to grow. This increases the threat of more violence.
References
- ^ sovereign citizen (www.theage.com.au)
- ^ sovereign citizen (theconversation.com)
- ^ before the courts (www.ruleoflaw.org.au)
- ^ emerging (www.unswlawjournal.unsw.edu.au)
- ^ who founded (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ dozens (theconversation.com)
- ^ Some estimates (www.theatlantic.com)
- ^ My Place (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ Many members (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ Know Your Rights (www.knowyourrightsgroup.com.au)
- ^ inherent to the movement (leb.fbi.gov)
- ^ deadly consequences (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
- ^ fired a gun (www.smh.com.au)
- ^ Why are police a target for sovereign citizen violence? (theconversation.com)
- ^ assaulting police (www.sbs.com.au)
- ^ arrest police officers (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ politicans (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ the United States (apnews.com)
- ^ Norway (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ Singapore (www.bbc.com)
- ^ stochastic terrorism (www.tandfonline.com)
- ^ regional inequality (www.actu.org.au)
- ^ must leave (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ can’t afford (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ older people (pt.icct.nl)
- ^ individual circumstances (theconversation.com)
- ^ 2022 annual threat assessment (www.asio.gov.au)
- ^ protests (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ internal briefings (www.afp.gov.au)
- ^ pseudolaw (theconversation.com)
- ^ further backlogs (www.judcom.nsw.gov.au)
- ^ arrest magistrates (www.theguardian.com)
- ^ What does Australian law have to say about sovereign citizens and 'pseudolaw'? (theconversation.com)
- ^ massive challenge (theconversation.com)
- ^ legal aid (theconversation.com)
Authors: Josh Roose, Associate Professor of Politics, Deakin University
