Researcher Spotlight: Harry Hobbs

Harry Hobbs is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of Law and Justice at the University of New South Wales. Harry's primary research interests are in public law and the rights of Indigenous peoples. He holds an ARC Discovery Early Career Research Award, where he is investigating Indigenous - State treaty-making in Canada and Aotearoa New Zealand to identify lessons for modern treaty-making processes in Australia. He has written widely on treaty in leading Australian and international law journals, such as the Sydney Law Review and the University of Toronto Law Journal, as well as more broadly on constitutional law, legal reform, human rights, transitional justice, and international criminal law.

What project are you working on that excites you?

I am very fortunate to have a DECRA that allows me to spend sustained time examining the public law questions surrounding Indigenous-State treaty processes. The defeat of the Voice referendum in 2023 has led most governments in Australia to reassess their previous commitment to talking treaty but Victoria is making steady progress. In fact, the First Peoples' Assembly of Victoria and the State government are expected to reach agreement on a Statewide Treaty before the end of the year. This would be the first formal treaty in Australian history.

Because we have never done this before, there are so many questions that can be explored. How can negotiations be conducted as fairly as possible? What form should the treaty take? How can Aboriginal law, lore, and cultural authority guide the process? Given treaties implicitly recognise the inherent authority and jurisdiction of both parties, will (and how) a Victorian treaty empower the First Peoples' Assembly with law-making authority? The treaty process operates within the Australian legal order, so is there a way to legally or politically insulate the agreement from unilateral change? These are just a few questions that are motivating my work in this space. There are lots more questions, so if you are interested, have questions, thoughts or ideas, please get in touch.

What do you hope to achieve with your research/impact & engagement in the next year?

Treaty processes require the support and understanding of two communities, Indigenous and non-Indigenous. I see my impact and engagement as largely directed to non-Indigenous Australians, explaining what a treaty is, how it works, what it offers, etc. As the Victorian treaty process moves closer to a Statewide settlement, I hope to be able to inform non-Indigenous Australians about what it might mean for Victoria and the country as a whole. We saw during the referendum that without understanding and ownership, important reforms in this area is vulnerable to scare campaigns. I have also been fortunate to be able to support the Victorian process through discussions, conversations and sharing my research with those involved. This has not only informed my scholarship by ensuring it remains practically focused, but has *hopefully* shaped some of the conversations internally.

What research/impact & engagement achievement are you most proud of and why?

A few years ago I was invited by the then NSW Shadow Minister for Treaty to serve on a panel to develop a treaty platform he could take to Shadow Cabinet for endorsement. I was invited to meet then Opposition Leader Chris Minns to explain the key points. The report was eventually adopted by NSW Labor and became government policy when they won the state election in 2022. Since then, things have moved slowly, but it was a real honour to be invited to draw on my comparative knowledge to help shape the preliminary stages of treaty talks in NSW.

Recent research focus: Sovereign Citizens and Pseudolaw

Alongside my treaty work, I am conducting empirical and theoretical research into the phenomenon of sovereign citizens and pseudolaw in Australia, particularly their impact on courts, local government, and even Indigenous sovereignty claims. The recent tragic murders in Victoria demonstrate the potential for extreme violence from this ideology, but far more common are mundane efforts to frustrate the effective administration of governance. This can be as simple as refusing to pay council rates or filing hundreds of pages of irrelevant documents in court.

This work builds on my earlier research on micronations. Micronations are a lot like real countries – they may have a government, a claimed territory, and a few citizens. They may even mint coins and issue postage stamps. The problem is that there is no legal basis for their existence – sadly the Magna Carta does not work like that. Largely dismissed as trivial, my work explored why ordinary people purport to secede and create their own country (some do so in a fit of rage over a tax bill, others to generate publicity for their own political or environmental goals), and how they perform sovereignty. My colleague and I found that Australia has one of the largest number of micronations in the world.

What’s the most mind-bending question you’re exploring right now?

Next week, the Victorian government will introduce legislation to give legal effect to the first formal treaty between Aboriginal nations and an Australian government ever negotiated. One question I have been exploring lately is how our public law institutions and concepts need to be reconfigured so that equitable talks can be conducted, and a treaty relationship can be embedded and implemented. This is all new for us here in Australia, so it certainly feels mind-bending!

What’s something surprising you’ve uncovered in your research?

That sovereign citizen pseudolaw spreads because entrepreneurs market it as a product. Sovereign citizen “gurus” sell “how-to” kits online, run seminars, and charge for templates that promise freedom from tax, fines, or mortgages. And they can make hundreds of thousands of dollars selling nonsense. Stopping pseudolaw relies, in part, on cracking down on these gurus and their websites.

If you could give a TED Talk tomorrow, what would it be about?

It would have to be on micronations. There are too many gripping stories about individuals seriously attempting to create their own country from scratch.

What impact do you hope to make in the next year?

I have spent the last six months speaking to judges and court administrators across the country about pseudolaw and sovereign citizens. There is an increasing recognition that this class of self-represented litigants is causing a significant strain on the administration of justice (and some adherents may go further than that). I hope that my research is supporting courts revise their processes and procedures to protect staff from intimidation, harassment (and worse), and minimise the extreme negative impact that this cohort is causing.