18C complaint … Not a good case … Laboured and snitty put-downs from hacks at The Australian … Email warrior takes on the “free speech” brigade … Tribal responses … Janek Drevikovsky reports
She alleged the three hacks, as well as News Corp Australia, Nationwide News, and the CEO of The Australian, had sent and published emails that fell foul of the well-known offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate provisions of the Racial Discrimination Act.
Ms Prins’ complaint had its origins in early 2017. An inveterate defender of s.18C, she set her sights on The Tamil, Planet and Headless, who she saw as “supporting the government’s, and right-wing groups’ efforts to remove or amend section 18C”.
Moderate citizens would understand her fury.
Prins painted a beguiling picture of Albrechtsen “riding with deadly Merritt and Thomas [in a] white racist posse”.
She posted these and other emails to the Australian’s Facebook page, in a social media blitz lasting from February to March 2017.
The revealing aspect of the case is the way these prickly hacks responded. They can dish it out but when it comes to receiving it, there’s a distinct lack of grace or panache.
Merritt, the Australian’s legal affairs man, couldn’t stand the strain and fired off a rejoinder to Prins, engaging his trademark laboured irony:
“Dear Sokhom Prins,
I do not usually respond to abusive emails, but in your case I will make an exception. I am offended and insulted on the basis of my race and ethnic background to be referred to as part of a white racist posse. I feel sure that my Tamil antecedents from southern India would share that opinion …
You might not be aware of this, but I am particularly sensitive. My feelings are easily hurt. This might be unreasonable, but under section 18C that’s your problem …
The law you are defending is flawed, unreasonable and skewed in favour of self-indulgent cry babies like me.
This, however, is your lucky day. Under the influence of the community standards of Australia – something that was drummed in to me by my migrant father – I have decided to toughen up, which I also recommend to you. I therefore have no intention of complaining to Gillian Triggs about your race-based abuse.
However in future tirades could you please stop referring to me as ‘white’ – remember, I’m very sensitive, unreasonable, easily offended and for now at least, I’ve got 18C on my side.
Kind regards and thanks for reading The Australian.
Chris Merritt”
The newspaper published Merritt’s email the next day, in an article entitled Dear Ms Prins, don’t call me white, I feel offended.
Prins redoubled her efforts, sending further emails and, in the process, the award-winning Thomas snapped …
“Dear Sokhom Prins
I respect your right to continue to make a fool of yourself. As you will respect my right to have freedom from loons and nutters.
But can you please remove my email address from your spam, and leave me to (what you regard as) my appalling racism?
It’s a simple request. Please stop sending me your hateful, racist garbage.
Alternatively, fuck off.
Regards
Hedley.“
The Planet added her voice, with this keep-off-our-patch message:
“Well said, Hedley and Chris. I echo your sentiments.
Sokhom, you have identified the wrong enemy. Best take off now.”
These three emails were the subject of Prins’ complaint. She said they were offensive, derisory, mocking and insulting, and had been sent because of her race, colour or national or ethnic origin.
She wanted compensation for hurt, humiliation and distress, as well as economic loss. She also pressed for aggravated or exemplary damages.
Prins began with a complaint to the Australian Human Rights Commission, but after that proved fruitless, she upscaled the matter into the Federal Circuit Court.
Judge Jarrett was not impressed with Prins’ conduct of the case:
“The affidavits trespass beyond the mere recitation of facts and consist, in the main, of argument. Nonetheless, I have had regard to them in their entirety, but not much in them is relevant.”
“[Prins’ statement of claim] runs to some 70 pages, is discursive in nature, is replete with internal references and cross-references and is unnecessarily prolix and dense.”
He declined to make a finding on whether the emails had in fact offended Prins. However, even assuming they had, he reasoned that her case would likely fail, because there was no good evidence that the trio of journalists had racial motivations for sending and publishing the emails.
“I accept the respondents’ submissions that there is no indication in either the email or the article either expressly or by necessary implication, that one of the reasons why [Merritt] sent his email and wrote his article was because of the race or ethnic origin of the applicant.”
He found the case against Albrechtsen and Thomas even weaker.
Accordingly, the complaint was without reasonable prospects of success, and dismissed. A costs hearing is still to come.