Currently before the courts is a racial vilification case against News Ltd flame thrower Andrew Bolt see here . As part of his defence, Bolt has argued that "the offending pieces ought in any case to be protected by the implied constitutional right to free speech".
This is marvellously ironic due to the fact that he has been an ardent critic of the Victorian Human Rights Charter, as well as being one of the leading voices who successfully scuttled a federal version being introduced. And as this court action is under federal law, there is no Charter to turn to for protection, instead he's being forced to rely on an "implied" right to free speech.
But he may very well find out that relying on "implied" protections are no substitute in a civilised society against the power of the State, or litigious or wealthy individuals.
Irony indeed.
No comments:
Post a Comment