Liberal MP and treasurer agree the translation says ‘correct way to vote’ but deny signs were unlawful or misleading

Gladys Liu and Josh Frydenberg have admitted that controversial Chinese-language signs instructed voters that the “correct” or “right” way to vote was to put a 1 next to the Liberal party candidate on ballot papers in the Victorian seats of Chisholm and Kooyong.

In their responses to challenges against their election the Liberal MP and the treasurer claim the Liberal party’s acting Victorian director, Simon Frost, “intended” the signs to say “to make your vote count put a 1 next to the Liberal candidate” but admit the translation meant “correct way to vote”, “correct voting method” or “the right way to vote”.

A retired social worker and climate campaigner, Naomi Leslie Hall, and the unsuccessful independent candidate for Kooyong, Oliver Yates, have brought the challenges to the election of Liu and Frydenberg, arguing the signs infringed electoral law provisions banning conduct that “misleads or deceives an elector in relation to the casting of a vote”.

Labor learned ‘all the wrong lessons’ from election defeat, Richard Di Natale says Read more

The Australian Electoral Commission inspected the signs on election day, 18 May, and noted they contained an authorisation by Frost, as required by electoral law. It concluded they were not misleading or deceptive, relying on a high court precedent that the prohibition is limited to the process of filling in a ballot paper, not influencing how voters formed their decision.

In nearly identical defences, obtained from the federal court by Guardian Australia, Frydenberg and Liu argue the signs were intended to urge electors to “make your vote count”, a phrase which appears to leave more room for voters to disagree than references to the “correct” or “right” way – which imply a vote for anyone other than the Liberal would be invalid.

Both disputed that Liberal corflutes used “the same colour scheme as was used by the AEC”, arguing it was merely “similar” to the AEC’s, and submitted that “other parties have used purple and white signs on polling booths” in the 2019 and previous elections. They did not provide examples.

The pair conceded the corflutes did not use traditional Liberal blue colours or logos, but argued that the Liberal party “used many different colours in connection with the election”.

Frydenberg and Liu denied that publication of the signs was done with their knowledge or authority. They said that Frost had authorised for them to be put up.

Liu admitted that she attended polling places in Chisholm and did not take action in relation to the signs, but did not admit she had called them “good signs”, as reported in the media. Nothing could be inferred from her attendance except that “she saw the corflute on polling day”, her defence said.

Clive Palmer $60m election spend shows need for cap, advocates say Read more

Frydenberg and Liu denied the signs were likely to mislead or deceive an elector in relation to the casting of a vote or were unlawful.

“Mr Frost did not set out to mislead any voter; rather, Mr Frost sought to explain to voters who could read Chinese and who were considering voting for the Liberal party how to do so in a valid way, and also to encourage voters who had not yet made up their mind to vote for the Liberal party,” they said.

Both denied that as a result of the signs it is likely some voters voted for the Liberal candidates “notwithstanding that such was not the vote that they otherwise intended to cast”, rejecting claims the signs affected the result.

Frydenberg won the seat of Kooyong with 55.7% of the two-party-preferred vote; Liu won Chisholm with 50.57%, a margin of just 1,090 votes over Labor’s Jennifer Yang.

Liu conceded that if just 546 voters in Chisholm had voted for Yang, the Labor candidate would have been elected.

Frydenberg and Liu asked the court to reject the petitions to declare they were not validly elected.

Frydenberg is facing a separate challenge from a Kooyong resident, Michael Staindl, who has argued he is disqualified by section 44(1) of the constitution because he is a citizen of Hungary, which Frydenberg denies.

The electoral law challenges return to the federal court on 11 October. The court of disputed returns eligibility challenge against Frydenberg is yet to be listed.