One Nation's ambitious project to establish local branches across the country is faltering, as the party grapples with internal inconsistencies and implements restrictive measures that undermine its purported commitment to free speech. The rapid expansion, initiated last August, was intended to create a grassroots movement, but it now faces a major restructuring prompted by legal vulnerabilities and attempts to silence dissenting voices.

Documents obtained by Guardian Australia reveal that One Nation's new general manager, Kelvin Morton, ordered the reconstitution of branches in April, following an internal review that uncovered “significant risks” within the newly established network. These risks include discrepancies in formal establishment minutes and non-compliant election processes for key branch roles, potentially exposing the party to legal challenges.

More concerning is the imposition of strict gag orders on new branches and members. All committee members and nominees must sign non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), while branches are subject to a “media silence” policy and a social media ban. These measures raise serious questions about the party's commitment to open dialogue and democratic participation, particularly given its self-proclaimed status as a champion of free speech.

One Nation's policy platform explicitly advocates for the right to free speech, calling for its enshrinement in the constitution. Yet, the party's actions contradict this stance, suggesting a willingness to suppress internal dissent and control the narrative surrounding its activities. This hypocrisy highlights a troubling pattern within far-right political movements, where the rhetoric of free speech is often used to defend hateful or discriminatory views while simultaneously silencing opposing voices.

The imposed restrictions are especially problematic given the party's history of divisive rhetoric and its targeting of marginalized communities. By limiting the ability of members to speak out, One Nation is effectively shielding itself from accountability and reinforcing its control over the party's message. This suppression of internal criticism is a hallmark of authoritarian political movements and should raise alarm bells among those committed to democratic values.

The internal review and subsequent restructuring also underscore the challenges of building a sustainable and inclusive political movement. The rush to expand without adequate attention to organizational infrastructure and member engagement has created vulnerabilities that could undermine the party's long-term viability. This situation highlights the importance of prioritizing democratic processes, transparency, and accountability in building a grassroots movement.