28 May '22 01:58:4914
Monica could go back to prison - update on her case
Reignite Democracy Australia
Read more here:
It is nothing short of totalitarian injustice for the Australian judiciary to support & unite with the police enforcement authorities under the malevolent and Stalinist charge of “incitement”
So for Monica’s political activism - something she has an implied right to do under the Australian constitution - she is not charged for her public political opinions and actions but for her “incitement”
So now we see this subjective and non-verifiable crime of “incitement” migrate from anti-discrimination civil law to criminal law.
This is a very serious development for Australia.
Let me explain.
Under anti discrimination law in Australia, if you make a statement on social media that “incites” hatred or contempt of a person or group belonging to a named class of people with named attributes, then you are in trouble with the law.
The problem is, “incitement” becomes a legal issue, and to defend yourself in a tribunal it is going to cost you a lot of money to hire lawyers.
Furthermore, you cannot win in a tribunal or court of law because “incitement” is not objectively verifiable. For most ordinary people your choice then to 1) plead guilty or 2) go bankrupt
I am a subscriber or RDA, so the question is, has Monica “incited” me?
Of course not. I don’t get “incited” by anyone. I am responsible for my own opinions and public acts.
Under anti discrimination law “incitement” comes under the section that deals with “vilification”
“Vilification” of minority groups on the grounds of their listed group identity or characteristics is “incitement” i.e., inciting hatred and contempt.
The named attributes under anti discrimination law are homosexuality, transgender status, skin color, and, in the Australian Capital Territory only, religious conviction.
So Monica has been charged with “incitement” not of minority persons or groups, but of “the general public”. Or maybe it’s “incitement” of hatred and contempt of the government.
Now here’s the thing.
You cannot win or defend yourself against an “incitement” charge under anti discrimination law because they have created case-law that makes any defense argument legally irrelevant
In my case** the tribunal ruled that 1) my social media comment was a “public act” 2) the truth or falsity of my social media comment was legally irrelevant 3) the “intentionality” behind my social media comment was legally irrelevant, and 4) the “actuality” of any person or group being “incited” by my social media comment is legally irrelevant.
Thus there is no legal defense one can amount in a charge of “incitement”
The only “legally relevant” factor was whether or not, in the subjective opinion of the magistrate, the words contained in my social media comment had the “capacity” to incite any internet user.
And so it is with Monica. She cannot win.
Her only option in to 1) plead guilty to create terrible precedent for Australia or, 2) go to jail for refusing to provide all the private correspondence and membership of Reignite Democracy Australia to the police.
** Burns v McKee  NSWCATAD 66 (6 March 2017
Sent from my iPhone← See Less