Courts hears details of Labor MP’s alleged assault of NT administrator

Federal Labor MP Luke Gosling allegedly struck the King’s representative in the Northern Territory with a hip-and-shoulder charge before later elbowing him in the torso during a confrontation at a Darwin cultural festival, a court has heard.

The details emerged as Gosling appeared in Darwin Local Court for the first time on Friday over allegations he assaulted Northern Territory Administrator David Connolly at the NT Grand Thai Festival on July 18.

Gosling, who denies the allegations, was before the court seeking changes to bail conditions that restricted his ability to attend official events where Connolly may also be present.

Darwin Local Court Judge Stephen Geary did not remove the restrictions, but amended Gosling’s bail conditions. The revised terms require Gosling to stay at least 15 metres away from Connolly and require his office to provide the Administrator’s office with 48 hours’ notice if the pair are expected to attend the same event.

Gosling had argued the restrictions risked undermining his ability to represent his Darwin electorate and fulfil his responsibilities as the government’s special envoy for defence, veterans’ affairs and northern Australia.

According to reporting by The Australian, the court heard the alleged incidents occurred about 30 minutes apart during the festival and formed the basis of two assault charges laid against the member for Solomon.

Gosling’s barrister Marty Aust argued his client needed to attend public events alongside the Administrator as part of his parliamentary duties, warning the existing conditions had the potential to create an unintended breach.

Aust told the court Gosling and Connolly had already attended an event together after the alleged incident without any trouble.

“What I really wish to stress to your honour is my client is presumed innocent, he has no criminal history, he has in fact attended an event after these allegations of which the administrator was present and there was no incident whatsoever,” Aust said, according to The Australian.

He also submitted the case against Gosling was “very weak”.

Aust said outside there was “a real concern that there’s a degree of politicisation” in the way the matter had been handled, arguing police could have issued a summons rather than arresting the MP at his Ludmilla home on Thursday morning.

The NT News earlier reported Northern Territory Police said officers made multiple attempts to contact Gosling by phone and email in the days before his arrest.

“The first I heard from the NT police was a phone message whilst I was working in Queensland two days ago,” Gosling told reporters outside court.

“I was elected to represent the people of Darwin and Palmerston … I have spoken with the prime minister, and just being clear that I’m going to contest these allegations, and that I will continue to serve.”

Police arrested Gosling on Thursday morning, taking him into custody before he was charged and released on bail.

The charges have prompted calls from the opposition for Gosling to stand aside from his government responsibilities while the matter is before the courts.

Acting prime minister Richard Marles defended the decision not to suspend Gosling, citing the presumption of innocence.

“Luke Gosling has obviously denied these allegations, there is a presumption of innocence in this country and from there this is now a matter that is going to play out before the courts,” Marles told News24, formerly Sky News Australia.

Northern Territory Police have rejected suggestions the investigation was politically motivated, saying the occupation, public position or political affiliation of those involved had no bearing on how the matter was handled.

“Allegations that the investigation has been politicised are without foundation,” police said in a statement.

According to the NT Criminal Code, anyone found guilty of an assault on the administrator while “he is engaged in the discharge of his official functions” could be imprisoned for up to 14 years.

Under section 44 of the Constitution, a federal MP convicted and sentenced for an offence punishable by at least one year’s imprisonment can be disqualified from parliament, meaning any conviction could trigger a byelection.