An Australian court has unanimously rejected an appeal by right-wing One Nation party leader Pauline Hanson to overturn a landmark judicial ruling that found she had racially discriminated against a Muslim senator, Al Jazeera and Reuters reported on Monday. A three-judge panel of the Full Federal Court of Australia dismissed all seven grounds of appeal filed by Hanson. The appellate judges affirmed that her social media attack on Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi was unlawful under national anti-vilification legislation and unprotected by constitutional political communication defences.
The legal battle originated from a September 2022 social media exchange following the death of Queen Elizabeth II. Senator Faruqi, who migrated to Australia from Pakistan in 1992 and became the country`s first Muslim female federal politician, posted that she could not mourn the leader of a colonizing empire built on stolen lives and wealth. In response, Hanson issued a public message telling Faruqi to pack her bags and leave the country. Faruqi subsequently filed a lawsuit under Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, alleging the comment constituted severe racial vilification.
In 2024, the Federal Court initially ruled that Hanson`s post was profoundly offensive, insulting, and intimidating to Muslim Australians and migrants of color. Hanson lodged an appeal against that verdict, arguing that her post did not amount to unlawful vilification and that her speech was protected under constitutional provisions regarding public interest debate. However, Federal Court Justices Melissa Perry, Geoffrey Kennett, and Elizabeth Bennett unanimously rejected her arguments, noting that restricting hostile, anti-immigrant slurs actually preserves the broader public`s ability to participate safely in democratic discourse.
Speaking to journalists outside the courthouse in Sydney, Senator Faruqi described the ruling as a significant victory for marginalized communities across the nation. She emphasized that hate speech cannot be masked as free speech, adding that the judgment sends a powerful message to public figures who employ xenophobic rhetoric. Australia`s Race Discrimination Commissioner also welcomed the verdict, highlighting that the court provided much-needed clarity on how intersectional racism targeting a person`s combined ethnic, religious, and immigrant identity is handled under federal law.
Following the dismissal, Hanson expressed deep disappointment with the verdict, claiming through a statement that public speech in Australia was becoming overly restricted. What remains unclear is whether her legal team will attempt a final appeal to the High Court of Australia, which serves as the nation`s supreme judicial authority. Hanson has 28 days to determine whether to file a petition with the apex court.
Human rights advocates and legal scholars have commended the decision, recognizing it as a crucial precedent in holding political figures accountable for Islamophobic rhetoric. The ruling establishes clear legal boundaries regarding online discourse, asserting that political freedom does not grant immunity for racial vilification against minorities in Australia.
