National Observer Home > No. 62 - Spring 2004 > Editorial Comment

Defamation Laws As a Form of Censorship

I.C.F. Spry

The basic principle for defamation laws must be that truth is always a defence. If a qualification is placed on this, a dangerous burden is imposed on freedom of speech.

This principle must be borne in mind in regard to Mr. Philip Ruddock's proposed uniform defam-ation laws. On the one hand it is sensible that the same defamation laws should apply in all Australian States and Territories. On the other hand the occasion should not be used to circumvent the defence of truth.

It is a matter of extreme concern that under Mr. Ruddock's proposals truth would not itself be a defence: it would also be necessary to establish that publication is "in the public interest". Of course a "public interest" test would be hopelessly uncertain. Different judges would have varying views according to their own social and political pre-conceptions. A grave impairment in free speech would ensue.

A further matter of concern is that Mr. Ruddock proposes changes to the law that would facilitate legal proceedings for "defamation" of dead persons. Again, here also it is important that this proposal be discontinued. Defamation laws should protect the reputations of the living. They should not impede historical analysis or discussions about those who are no longer alive.

Mr. Ruddock was a firm and principled Minister for Immigration, and he should not proceed with these proposals (which are, fortunately, opposed broadly by State Attorneys-General). It is only fair to Mr. Ruddock to point out that this matter was inherited by him from the former Attorney-General, Mr. Daryl Williams, who revealed himself to be weak and apparently incapable of performing his office satisfactorily.

National Observer No. 62 - Spring 2004