Andrew Bolt in court

Senator Conroy’s attack on News Ltd is not the only attack on the freedom of the press. Andrew Bolt, columnist and blogger is also being attacked for voicing an opinion that runs counter to the perception that a white guy can’t comment on indigenous affairs in other than in glowing terms.

In an ABC interview in 2006, retiring Federal Court judge Ron Merkel, QC, said, “I found cases that would come before me where the actual outcome was something no one ever intended.” Eatock v Bolt may come to illustrate his point. Everyone agrees that it is a very important case and already, at the time of writing and despite the matter being sub judice, there has been widespread commentary published about it. But, in a case which the prosecution argued was about Aboriginal identity while the defence maintained it was about free speech, just why it is important may not become clear until the judge’s decision is handed down. Some of the plaintiffs have not held back from giving their points of view to the media and it seems everyone has commented except Andrew Bolt, who has been gagged by his legal advisers. Even Michael Lavarch wrote an article in the Weekend Australian defending the legislation the case rests on, the Racial Discrimination Act, which he had introduced as Attorney-General in the Keating government in 1995. Interestingly, his comments referred only to free speech.

Aboriginal identity or free speech. Read and decide yourself. It is a good summary of the court hearings so far and I have linked mainly to provide a record.