In a blistering statement, Ms Cannold said she could not remain as a candidate because to do so would be implicitly making a statement that the WikiLeaks Party was what it claimed to be - "a democratically run party that both believes in transparency and accountability, and operates in this way". "Over the last few weeks those of us resigning and some others have been struggling to make this true," she said. "Over the course of the vigorous debates that have taken place over preferences there have been consistent challenges to the rights of the National Council, the 11 person democratic governing body of the WikiLeaks Party, to do its job: to make democratic, transparent and accountable decisions. Since June when I joined the campaign, I have been concerned that where disagreement exists with decisions Council makes, these have been white-anted and resisted, forcing Council to reaffirm these decisions and assert their right to make them. "At one point, there was a direct challenge to the Council's democratic right to decide and implement decisions about preference and instead proposed that it become a rubber stamp. This was rejected by Council."

The resignation comes days after the WikiLeaks Party came under fire for directing its preferences to the Shooters and Fishers Party and the white nationalist Australia First Party ahead of both major parties and the Greens in the NSW Senate race. In a statement issued on Sunday, the WikiLeaks Party said its National Coucil decided the Shooters and Fishers and the Australia First party should have been below Greens, Labor and Liberal but administrative problems were to blame. And in WA, the WikiLeaks Party preferenced the Nationals in the Senate ahead of one of its biggests supporters, Greens Senator Scott Ludlum. The decision to preference the Nationals above Senator Ludlam angered high-profile WikiLeaks supporter and former SBS newsreader Mary Kostakidis who tweeted it was a ''major error in judgment''. In the resignation statement on Wednesday, Ms Cannold hit out at the failure to lodge Senate preference forms in WA and NSW in line with the National Council's instructions.

She said despite resistance, party members who wanted the problem reviewed prevailed. But those who fought for the review ‘‘felt tired and disillusioned’’ and were then hit with a ‘‘bombshell’’. ‘‘A member of the party rang two key volunteers in succession and requested that they join with him in going outside the party's formal structures,’’ Ms Cannold said. ‘‘In these phone calls, the Council was denigrated and a proposal made to each volunteer in succession that they join with select candidates and Council members in taking direction from other than the National Council. ‘‘The consequence of the proposal was that the National Council and two of the campaign coordinators - also National Council members who have been actively involved in pushing for the preference review - would be bypassed.’’

She said a campaign staffer also received a phone call that contradicted the public statement issued by the WikiLeaks Party on Wednesday that the review of preferences would be immediate and independent. Instead, the review would be delayed until after the election and would not be independent, Ms Cannold said. ‘‘This is the final straw,’’ she said. ‘‘As long as I believed there was a chance that democracy, transparency and accountability could prevail in the party I was willing to stay on and fight for it. But where a party member makes a bid to subvert the party's own processes, asking others to join in a secret, alternative power centre that subverts the properly constituted one, nothing makes sense anymore. ‘‘This is an unacceptable mode of operation for any organisation but even more so for an organisation explicitly committed to democracy, transparency and accountability.’’