Antinuclear

Tasmanian government moves to restrict citizen’s power to criticise corporations

The examples of public campaigners being on the butt end of large-scale legal responses are too numerous to mention, but we should not forget: the Bannockburn Yellow Gum Action Group, the Hindmarsh Bridge campaigners, John Sinclair who campaigned to stop mining on Fraser Island, anti-nuclear campaigner Noel Wauchope and even the author of Forest-Friendly Building Timbers, who ran foul of the National Association of Forest Industries, resulting in some retailers withdrawing the book from sale.

Companies suing critics. That’s the real enemy of free speech  Richard Ackland, Guardian 23 Jan 15 Tasmania wants to break ranks with uniform defamation laws to allow companies to take action against individuals. ….

The Coalition government fought hard to give the captains and cabin boys of industry what they wanted. Ruddock insisted that companies be able to sue their detractors in the courts, but the Labor state governments wanted the prohibition against corporate libel actions to be the rule across the nation. It was one of the sticking points during the negotiations and, in the end, to get agreement Ruddock relented.

There was a weird sort of compromise, whereby only very small corporations, of less than 10 employees, could sue in their own name. This was a crumb tossed off the table so the commonwealth attorney general could save face.

Such has been the case since the uniform Defamation Act came into being in 2006. Now, nine years later, the Hodgman Liberal government in Tasmania is proposing to break ranks, amend its act and let corporations of all stripes off the leash so they can sink their fangs into citizens critical of “job creating” proposals………

In the US these sort of legal claims were christened Slapp actions – strategic lawsuits against public participation. They were designed to shut people up, drown them in huge legal bills and generally put annoying small fry out of business………

There have been some diabolical excursions by large companies seeking to gag critics……….

The examples of public campaigners being on the butt end of large-scale legal responses are too numerous to mention, but we should not forget: the Bannockburn Yellow Gum Action Group, the Hindmarsh Bridge campaigners, John Sinclair who campaigned to stop mining on Fraser Island, anti-nuclear campaigner Noel Wauchope and even the author of Forest-Friendly Building Timbers, who ran foul of the National Association of Forest Industries, resulting in some retailers withdrawing the book from sale.

Even if many of these cases do not result in finality before a court, it is the legal bills that force public interest defendants to roll over and shut up. The outcome is a frightful timidity in public discussion of issues that ought to be publicly critiqued. The corporates avoid fighting with good arguments in the public domain, instead preferring litigation………..the real enemy of free speech lies in a cumbersome, expensive, uniform Defamation Act, skewed in favour of plaintiffs…….

To further restrict the ability of public interest campaigners to press their case, as the Tasmanian government proposes, is to make Australia’s free speech landscape deeply depressing. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/23/companies-suing-critics-thats-the-real-enemy-of-free-speech

January 24, 2015 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | civil liberties, Tasmania