[LINK] Censorship in action - US TV

[Chirgwin, Richard]

Only a few days late - back from holidays and typing is slow...

>> The High Court can't grant rights.  It can only interpret 
> rights in the 
> Constitution

Greg - its powers go beyond interpreting constitutional rights; it can also
apply rights which exist in the common law to the cases which come before
it.

RC

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Taylor [mailto:gtaylor2 at tpg.com.au]
> Sent: Thursday, 24 April 2003 00:19
> To: link at anu.edu.au
> Subject: Re: [LINK] Censorship in action - US TV
> 
> 
> At 09:36 PM 23/04/03 +1000, Howard Lowndes wrote:
> >  ..
> >Actually "freedom of political expression" was a right 
> granted by the High
> >Court when making a ruling with relation to the 
> Constitution.  I cannot
> >cite the exact detail.  However, it does not extend to "freedom of
> >speech".
> 
> The High Court can't grant rights.  It can only interpret 
> rights in the 
> Constitution, and the relevant decisions of the court in this 
> area are not 
> as wide as some believe when they refer to the so called "freedom of 
> political expression".
> 
> The main cases were:
> David Russell Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation 
> (1997)   FC 97/021
> http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/unrep324.html
> 
> THEOPHANOUS v THE HERALD AND WEEKLY TIMES LIMITED AND ANOTHER 
> (1994)   F.C. 
> 94/041
> http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/182clr104.html
> 
> STEPHENS AND OTHERS v WEST AUSTRALIAN NEWSPAPERS LIMITED 
> (1994)   F.C. 94/040
> http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/182clr211.html
> 
> These were all defamation cases involving the defence of 
> qualified privilege.
> 
> In Theophanous, the court found (in a split decision):
> "There is implied in the Commonwealth Constitution a freedom to
> publish material:
> (a) discussing government and political matters;
> (b) of and concerning members of the Parliament of the Commonwealth
>      of Australia which relates to the performance by such members of
>      their duties as members of the Parliament or parliamentary
>      committees;
> (c) in relation to the suitability of persons for office as members
>      of the Parliament."
> 
> but this is subject to conditions being met re recklessness 
> as regards the 
> truth etc.
> 
> In Lange the court further restricted the defence.  (There 
> had been some 
> changes to the composition of the court between 1994 and 1997).
> 
> For further information on this issue, see:
>    Free Speech Rights & Australian Law
>    http://libertus.net/censor/fspeechlaw.html
> 
> Usual disclaimer:  IANAL.
> 
> Greg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
>