polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 11
th, 2017 at 4:41pm:
freediver wrote on Aug 11
th, 2017 at 1:01pm:
Still not sure why it is even relevant that they might have been sued under other legislation. 18c still denies everyone freedom of speech. Toben was not jailed for slander. He was jailed for having the wrong opinion on the holocaust.
In the one case in which someone has been gaoled over 18c, the judge went out of her way to find actual instances of slander. I think this is interesting, and significant.
Sounds to me like the judge also has a principled objection to 18c.
Was Toben actually found guilty of slander?
Quote:So that gives 2 precedents (including the Bolt case), in which the court has ordered the defendant to remove published material that specifically defamed people on the basis of race. I don't know of any other case that breaks this mould.
Are you suggesting that 18c would not be enforced in the absence of a violation of some other law? Or is this just a limp wristed way of supporting a law you know to be wrong?
Quote:The point here is, no one has been gaoled or ordered to be silenced for making academic arguments about holocaust denial.
Are you saying it is not a restriction on free speech if people are only jailed for making "non-academic" arguments?
Quote:The evidence as I see it, tells me that mere denial of the holocaust cannot be deemed to be a violation of 18c - despite what Brandis said a couple of years ago. To be a violation, I would need to literally slander people along racial grounds (eg jews) - according to the two precedents that we have.
Toben was not found guilty of slander. The verdict actually proves this. You claim that the people who went after Bolt and Toben did so to prove a point, but the point seems to have eluded you. The slander allegations have not been tested in court. The point they proved is that holocaust denial, and whatever Bolt was found guilty for, is by itself illegal.
Quote:Is that a case for removing 18c on the basis of it being redundant?
You miss the point Gandalf. They did not prove that it is the same as slander. The guilty verdicts prove that it is a separate crime.
Quote:Quite possible - though I reiterate my previous point about 18c reinforcing desirable cultural norms (and which incidentally is basically the argument everyone else who defends it uses).
Is this a limp wristed excuse for denying people freedom of speech? Do you actually think people should be put in jail for not conforming to "desirable cultural norms"? What other norms would you have the government impose on people?
Quote:But irrespective of that, any notion that 18c is a recipe for some dangerous slippery slope vis having our freedoms taken away from us is clearly unfounded. The law has been in place for over 40 years, and to my knowledge it has not caused anyone to have their freedom of speech removed over and beyond what any defamation case would have done.
Yes it has. Toben was ordered to cease denying the holocaust. No slader verdict would have restricted his freedom of speech in this manner. You acknowledge but at the same time miss the point of convicting him under 18c rather than slander legislation. It was to prove that holocaust denial is by itself illegal.