download.jfif

THE ROLE OF PARLIAMENT IN PROTECTING FREE SPEECH: FOUR VERY DIFFERENT CASE STUDIES

This article was published in The West Australian Jurist, Vol 4, where I discuss the vexed issue of freedom of speech. In this paper, I focus on the role of Australian State parliaments in protecting free speech and in limiting it, when considered justified by other public interests. I reference this to four different case studies: shield laws for journalists; the sexualisation of children; hate-speech laws and parliamentary privilege.

The common law approach to freedom of speech and communication is as follows: β€œThe general rule is that anyone is entitled to communicate anything he pleases to anyone else, by speech or in writing or in any other way. That rule is limited by the law of defamation and other restrictions ... imposed in the light of considerations of public interest such as to countervail the public interest in freedom of expression.”

In Australia, subject to the right to freedom of political communication held by the High Court to be implied by the provisions of the Constitution of Australia establishing a system of representative government, State Parliaments have the power to pass laws restricting freedom of speech.

To read this article in full, click here