MARK COLVIN: So. Fredrick Töben, the notorious Holocaust denier in Adelaide, would possibly be free to operate as he wishes? TIM SOUTPHOMMASANE: That may be possible. MARK COLVIN: And what about if somebody shouts, ‘Ape’ at Adam Goodes again? TIM SOUTPHOMMASANE: Again? MARK COLVIN: From a football crowd. TIM SOUTPHOMMASANE: Again, you would have to demonstrate, under the definition of vilification in the language of the proposed amendment, that it would incite a third party to racial hatred. Currently it is sufficient for someone to hold another person accountable for their words or actions if it has the effect of offending, insulting, humiliating or intimidating them on the basis of race - which focuses the attention on the harms that are actually being caused on another person, as opposed to the effects on the third party. MARK COLVIN: So to be clear, Adam Goodes, under the old law, would have had the opportunity to use that law in those circumstances, but will not any longer? TIM SOUTPHOMMASANE: That is one interpretation you can take. abc.net.au/pm/content/2014/s3971255.htm
Posted on: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 12:14:40 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015