A magistrate has rejected a climate protester's claims that it was reasonable for him to block traffic outside Parliament House for an hour-and-a-half by gluing one of his hands to a road during a sitting week.
Chief Magistrate Lorraine Walker found Jeremy Rhind guilty earlier this month of unreasonable obstruction, but she dismissed a related charge of failing or refusing to provide his name to a police officer.
A published ACT Magistrates Court decision shows Rhind was among about 20 protesters who assembled, with placards and banners, at the front of Parliament House on October 19 last year.
"A number of them were wearing outfits representative of trees and koalas," Ms Walker said.
"The protesters were singing and dancing."
About 8am, Rhind and some others moved onto a road adjacent to the Parliament House forecourt.
"He glued his left hand to the road surface," Ms Walker said.
"He did not leave until the glue was dissolved by police officers, at which point he was escorted from the area."
The detective sergeant in charge of the scene of the incident asked Rhind for his name a number of times, both there and at the police station to which the defendant was subsequently taken.
Rhind, who pleaded not guilty to both charges, failed to provide his name until some hours later.
He gave evidence in court, saying the protest had been timed to coincide with a parliamentary sitting week.
It was the week before the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow, and Ms Walker said the aim had been "to have maximum impact on the government's international negotiation position".
"He glued his hand to the road in order to prolong the protest," the magistrate said.
Prosecutor Laura Hannigan told the court Rhind had put himself in danger by gluing himself to the road, causing police to block off a key thoroughfare at peak hour in order to protect him.
Rhind, who represented himself, accepted his conduct had been disruptive but argued it was not unreasonable.
He claimed, among other things, that his actions were in the interests of the public and Australia as a nation, that people would expect protests in that location, and that any detours would only be of minor inconvenience.
Ms Walker ultimately found the obstruction Rhind had caused was "unreasonable by the standards of ordinary people", taking into account factors that included the protest having moved from a space specifically designated for such activities onto a public road.
She also considered that his actions had placed himself and potentially emergency services personnel at risk, with specialist search and rescue police required to go onto the road and use their time and skills to unglue him.
The charge relating to Rhind's failure to provide his name was dismissed after Ms Walker pointed out to Ms Hannigan that police never told the man why they required his details before arresting him.
Rhind was only informed of the reason after he had been arrested, by which time he had a right to silence.
The decision does not indicate whether or not Rhind has been sentenced for the unreasonable obstruction.
