The Forum > General Discussion > Section 18c: a threat to free speech
Section 18c: a threat to free speech
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Page 5
-
- All
| The National Forum | Donate | Your Account | On Line Opinion | Forum | Blogs | Polling | About |
![]() |
Syndicate RSS/XML |
|
| About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy |
She thinks that the High Court will be asked, after all those years it has existed, if Parliament can prohibit race based political speech “merely because it is offensive” (to some people).
If Pauline Hanson appeals to the High Court over her loss against Senator Faruqi's whinge, 18c will be on trial. As will the fact that Faruqi's offensive tweet against Queen Elizabeth was not proscribed by Parliament - only Hanson's.
Clegg also writes that the Federal Court's finding against Hanson's appeal is impenetrable, “even to lawyers”. She is also astonished that the High Court has never ruled on whether a law prohibiting specifically race-based speech is likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate is “compatible with our Constitution”.
The full Federal Court, unlike the judge who found against Hanson in the first place, accepted that 18c puts a “significant burden” on political communication.
Efforts to oust 18c have failed because, according to Clegg, “... at least in part because our society has no fundamental understanding of the importance of freedom of speech”. A High Court appeal might stimulate public debate.
An appeal by Hanson would also show us if the “implied freedom” of political communication in the Constitution is the “real deal”.