G+T Centre of Public Law Constitutional Law Conference 14 February 2014 Sydney Monis v The Queen; A-G South Australia v City of Adelaide – Consequences for Freedom of Expression Katharine Gelber 1 The last year has been an unusually high profile one for freedom of speech. In addition to the Monis and City of Adelaide judgments, free speech was in the news, and formed a somewhat unexpected focus in the September 2013 federal election campaign and afterwards. Several issues combined to generate that focus. The first was the Finkelstein inquiry into the Australian media, launched by the previous federal government in 2011 in response to international media coverage of illegal phone hacking by journalists in the United Kingdom, 2 the report of which was released by the government in March 2012. The report recommended inter alia the formation of a new, publicly-funded regulatory body that would set journalistic standards in consultation with industry, and provide a complaints mechanism for breaches of those standards, which could include requiring a media outlet to publish an apology, correction, retraction or reply. 3 Media organisations in Australia responded hostilely to this suggestion, describing the proposal as a ‘super-regulator with far- reaching powers’, and arguing the ‘preposterous’ proposal threatened media freedom and freedom of speech. 4 The proposal was not carried forward by the government. The second was the seriously ill-advised proposal also by the previous federal government, in the context of reforming and harmonising anti-discrimination laws, 5 to revise the definition of discrimination in federal law to include ‘conduct that offends, insults or intimidates’ 6 on any of the 1 Katharine Gelber is a Professor and ARC Future Fellow (2012-2015) in the School of Political Science and International Studies at the University of Queensland. 2 R Finkelstein, Report of the Independent Inquiry into the Media and Media Regulation, Commonwealth of Australia, February 2012, p. 15. 3 Finkelstein, Report, pp. 8-9. 4 see eg The Australian, ‘News To Fight Media Regulation’, The Australian, 13 July 2012; Amanda Meade & Simon Canning, ‘Watchdog a threat to free press, claim news chiefs’, The Australian, 3 March 2012; Harold Mitchell, ‘Leave the Newspapers Alone to do their Job’, The Age, 9 March 2012. 5 Parliament of Australia, Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee, Exposure Draft of the Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill 2012 (February 2013) http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate_Committees?url=legcon_ctte/complete d_inquiries/2010-13/anti_discrimination_2012/report/index.htm. 6 Draft Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill 2012, s19(2)(b). 1