Defamation and Freedom of Speech
Problem 3: Defamation and Freedom of Speech
The committee makes the following recommendations on the proposed programs:
The Followers: * An allegation made by a Western Australian MP, Greg Saunders, in Question Time, that a prominent, unmarried member of the Federal Cabinet is a homosexual.
This committee sees no problem in discussing an allegation made by Greg Saunders, MP, in Question Time that a prominent, unmarried member of the Federal Cabinet is a homosexual. This conclusion has been derived from many factors.
Firstly, in order for a defamation case to come to light, the defamatory material must likely cause ordinary, reasonable persons to think less of the plaintiff, expose the plaintiff to hatred or contempt, or cause the plaintiff to be shunned. In the current social climate, simply labeling an individual as a homosexual is not sufficient for a defamation case, especially when the individual is unmarried. The same may not be the case where a married individual is involved, where such a comment could imply them cheating on their spouse which may have religious or other connotations.
Secondly, as the allegation was made in Question Time, Greg Saunders, MP, is afforded absolute privilege over his comments and is in no way liable under defamation. As long as the discussion surrounding the allegation is honest and a true representation of those comments, the radio broadcasters, although not generally regarded as having a duty to report to the public, may report on court and parliamentary proceedings.
Thirdly, as the allegation does not single out an individual, it would be hard for a defamation suit to be brought against the radio broadcasters. Even though all the unmarried members of the Federal Cabinet could potentially bring action, stating that the allegation could be directed at them, the group would be deemed too large, although this could be dependent on the number of married and unmarried members. * A rumour that the Minister for
The committee makes the following recommendations on the proposed programs:
The Followers: * An allegation made by a Western Australian MP, Greg Saunders, in Question Time, that a prominent, unmarried member of the Federal Cabinet is a homosexual.
This committee sees no problem in discussing an allegation made by Greg Saunders, MP, in Question Time that a prominent, unmarried member of the Federal Cabinet is a homosexual. This conclusion has been derived from many factors.
Firstly, in order for a defamation case to come to light, the defamatory material must likely cause ordinary, reasonable persons to think less of the plaintiff, expose the plaintiff to hatred or contempt, or cause the plaintiff to be shunned. In the current social climate, simply labeling an individual as a homosexual is not sufficient for a defamation case, especially when the individual is unmarried. The same may not be the case where a married individual is involved, where such a comment could imply them cheating on their spouse which may have religious or other connotations.
Secondly, as the allegation was made in Question Time, Greg Saunders, MP, is afforded absolute privilege over his comments and is in no way liable under defamation. As long as the discussion surrounding the allegation is honest and a true representation of those comments, the radio broadcasters, although not generally regarded as having a duty to report to the public, may report on court and parliamentary proceedings.
Thirdly, as the allegation does not single out an individual, it would be hard for a defamation suit to be brought against the radio broadcasters. Even though all the unmarried members of the Federal Cabinet could potentially bring action, stating that the allegation could be directed at them, the group would be deemed too large, although this could be dependent on the number of married and unmarried members. * A rumour that the Minister for
Bibliography: Texts and Articles: Ackland, R, 1999, The Law and Freedom of the Media, ‘Law Review, University of Technology, Sydney, No Beattie S, & Beal E, 2007, Connect and Converge: Australian Media and Communications Law, Oxford University Press, Melbourne, Chesterman, M, 2000, Freedom of speech in Australian law: a delicate plant, Ashgate, Aldershot, England Jordan R, 2002, Free Speech and the Constitution, Law and Bills Digest Group, Research Note no. 42 2001-02, Australia Justice Michael McHugh, October 1986, Gazette of Law and Journalism, Sydney Klein, N, 1999, No Logo, St Martin’s Press, USA Lobez, S, 2001, Episode 2:Defamation, ‘Law Matters’, ABC Television, Sydney Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW) Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997) 189 CLR 520 Racial Hatred Act 1995 (Cth) Theophanous v Herald and Weekly Times (1994) 182 CLR104 Western Aboriginal Legal Service Ltd v Jones (2000) NSW ADT 102 -------------------------------------------- [ 1 ]. Beattie S, & Beal E, 2007, Connect and Converge: Australian Media and Communications Law, Oxford University Press, Melbourne, p14 [ 2 ] [ 5 ]. Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997) 189 CLR 520 [ 6 ] [ 9 ]. (1994) 182 CLR104 [ 10 ] [ 13 ]. Chesterman, M, 2000, Freedom of speech in Australian law: a delicate plant, Ashgate, Aldershot, England [ 14 ]