WA Police targeted self-described ‘sovereign citizens’. But how many are out there?

Western Australia’s top cop says those targeted in an operation cracking down on gun ownership among people with “sovereign citizen” views had “self-identified”.

Police Commissioner Col Blanch told Radio 6PR on Tuesday he proactively began the crackdown after receiving an “awful lot” of correspondence from people identifying as sovereign citizens.

A sovereign citizen is someone who believes, among other things, they are not bound by the laws of the state they live in.

This masthead revealed on Saturday police had seized 135 firearms in raids on people who had expressed views aligning with the sovereign citizen movement.

WA officers executed 70 searches at different addresses across suburban Perth and regional towns, and cancelled or suspended 44 firearm licences. Officers also inspected 26 firearm storage units.

The Sovereign Peoples Assembly of Western Australia issued a statement on Tuesday in response to the raids.

“The Sovereign Peoples Assembly of Western Australia firmly rejects recent claims suggesting that individuals associated with so-called ‘sovereign citizen’ movements pose a danger to the People,” it read.

“This narrative has been irresponsibly promoted and weaponised to justify the unlawful seizure of lawfully owned firearms from peaceful, responsible, and registered owners, during raids conducted in WA this past week.”

Police laid 18 charges as a result of the operation.

“Operation Ascendant was based on those that identified themselves as sovereign citizens,” Blanch said on Tuesday.

“At times, I receive an awful lot – as I know members of parliament do – of correspondence … from sovereign citizens that say, ‘We don’t recognise your authority, we don’t recognise your jurisdiction’.

“They pretty much identify themselves [and] it’s very much projected by themselves that they do not abide by the laws of Western Australia.”

However, Dr Stephen Young, an expert in pseudo-law ideologies, said it was very rare that a person actually identified themselves explicitly as a sovereign citizen.

“Historically, there were only very few people that self-identify as sovereign citizens,” he said.

“But there’s people who are saying things like, ‘You can distance yourself or remove yourself from the jurisdiction of the state’.

“But when people say there’s a legal means for doing that, they’re following a sovereign citizen script. We call them, conventionally, sovereign citizens.”

Griffith University criminology expert Dr Keiran Hardy said people who identified with sovereign citizen beliefs often rejected the label.

“They won’t say ‘I am a sovereign citizen’,” he said.

“The whole point is that they believe that they are not subject to the laws, and they’re saying sovereign citizen is an oxymoron. It means - ‘I’m saying I’m not subject to your laws in the same way that everyone else is, and I’m almost not a citizen of this country, so don’t call me a sovereign
citizen’.”

However, he said their ideological beliefs were often the same.

“If their belief or feeling is ‘I hate police, I feel controlled’ - It doesn’t really matter [the label] but it comes out in conspiracy theory and extreme ideology,” Hardy said.

During a press conference on Sunday, Blanch said officers had identified about 1000 West Australians whose views aligned with the ideology.

He did not answer questions about whether the raids would be an ongoing exercise by police, and said while he understood some criticism about their targeted nature, it was more important to protect officers on the beat and the broader public.

Young said the raids were a “net positive”.

“I think it’s good when government actors are taking sovereign citizens seriously,” he said.

“The problem is that when you’re cracking down and actually enforcing the law, this can actually fuel the narrative people have - that the state is tyrannical and that is conspiratorial against them, that it’s trying to silence them.

“[But] my first thought is, this is the right thing to do.”

The SPAWA claimed the raids were “unlawful”.

“These recent police actions are viewed as disproportionate and unlawful, raising serious human rights and procedural concerns,” the group’s statement said.

“Let’s remember that these people are public servants paid on the public purse and are answerable to us.”

However, Young disagreed.

“I think when people have not just beliefs but when they’ve taken steps in such a way to say, ‘I’m not under your jurisdiction’ – then they don’t get the benefits of that state law and gun ownership.”

Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.