A refugee advocate has won an appeal in a defamation case in the federal court against Defence Minister Peter Dutton.
Last year, Dutton sued Shane Bazzi over a now-deleted Twitter post which accused Dutton of being a “rape apologist”. Bazzi was ordered to pay $35,000 in damages at the time.
Now, a panel of three federal court judges has overturned the ruling, saying the tweet did not carry the imputation that Dutton excused rape.
“The tweet no doubt conveys an impression that is derogatory and critical of Mr Dutton’s attitude to rape or rape allegations, but it does not go so far as to convey the impression that Mr Dutton is a person who excuses rape,” the judges said in their decision on Tuesday.
The now-deleted tweet linked to a news story published by the Guardian, reporting on comments made by Dutton in 2019, where he is quoted claiming some female refugees on Nauru were “trying it on” to get a medical transfer to Australia.
Tuesday’s court decision overturned the defamation ruling made late last year.
“You know that feeling when you help raise $150k to defend a defamation case brought by Peter Dutton against a good bloke like @shanebazzi and then Shane wins!” Greens politician David Shoebridge said on Twitter.
“That’s the feeling I have right now as the appeal decision has just been handed down in Shane’s favour.”
Greens Senator Larissa Waters also congratulated Bazzi on the appeal.
“Huge congratulations to @shanebazzi for his win against Peter Dutton. Let’s hope this means politicians will think twice before using the courts as a weapon to silence citizens who are fighting for the rights of others,” she said.
Huge congratulations to @shanebazzi for his win against Peter Dutton. Let’s hope this means politicians will think twice before using the courts as a weapon to silence citizens who are fighting for the rights of others. #auspol
— Larissa Waters (@larissawaters) May 17, 2022
Bazzi’s lawyers argued in their appeal that the tweet would have been interpreted in the context of the Guardian article.
“He contended that, if the tweet were read as a whole, the reader would have used the Guardian material together with the six word statement to discern that the criticism was directed at Mr Dutton’s remarks about some women making false allegations of rape to obtain a migration outcome,” the full court said on Tuesday.
“The Guardian material centres on allegations of rape, not the actual commission of it.
“When that material is read with Mr Bazzi’s six words, the reader would conclude that the tweet was suggesting that Mr Dutton was skeptical about claims of rape and in that way was an apologist. But that is very different from imputing that he excuses rape itself.”