Latest news with #proIsrael
Daily Mail
7 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Taxpayers facing a $2million-plus bill for ABC's failed legal fight against Antoinette Lattouf
Taxpayers are facing a $2million-plus bill for the Australian public broadcaster's failed legal defence of its decision to fire a radio host for her views on Gaza. Antoinette Lattouf, 41, was awarded $70,000 in damages after winning her unlawful termination case in the Federal Court on Wednesday. The journalist was dismissed three days into a five-day casual radio shift in December 2023 due to a co-ordinated campaign of complaints from pro-Israel lobbyists. She shared a Human Rights Watch post saying Israel was using starvation as a 'weapon of war' in Gaza before she was terminated. Senior ABC figures told a Senate hearing in February that the broadcaster tried to settle the case on multiple occasions and had already spent $1.1 million on external lawyers to defend itself. ABC managing director Hugh Marks indicated total costs were likely to soar beyond $2 million, with Justice Rangiah yet to determine whether the ABC will pay a penalty or Lattouf's legal costs. 'It will be millions and it is not a good use of taxpayer funds,' Mr Marks told ABC Radio Melbourne on Thursday morning. 'I would suspect so (more than $2 million) because I wasn't completely aware as to where the trial will go but it sounds like there's still more work to do. 'It would have been better if it settled, it would have been better if it hadn't happened at all.' Lattouf offered to settle the case for $85,000 in July but it was rejected, her lawyer said. Josh Bornstein has revealed there were other conditions to the proposed peace deal, including an apology and another five radio shifts. Mr Marks suggested the extra radio slots were a sticking point as they would have invited the ABC to compromise its editorial independence to external influence. Justice Rangiah found the ABC had unlawfully fired Lattouf for holding a political opinion. The judgment was a complete vindication of Lattouf reposting a report that was '100 per cent accurate' and had already been covered by the ABC, former Human Rights Watch head Kenneth Roth said. Mr Roth said she did 'nothing wrong' and he was amazed the ABC had spent so much money fighting the case, even if 'undoubtedly embarrassed' at succumbing to external pressure. To be very clear, the open offer made in July 2024 to settle the case by @antoinette_news was : 1. An apology; 2. Payment of $85k compensation: 3. Providing 5 shifts on radio. The ABC rejected it, apparently because it wants to continue to blacklist @antoinette_news. — Josh Bornstein (@JoshBBornstein) June 25, 2025 'They've made a bad situation worse,' he told ABC Radio. The decision was 'groundbreaking' and gave clarity to employers about political opinions expressed by employees off-duty, Associate Professor of Law Giuseppe Carabetta told AAP. There were still questions, however, he said, pointing to comments - that he had received - that the judgment would help someone get away with hate speech. 'I don't think the decision means that at all,' he said. 'But we still don't know how far political opinion will go. That's the unknown.' The decision also reignited calls for a national human rights act. '(This litigation) draws attention to the current lack of a constitutional right to freedom of speech in Australia,' Australian Lawyers Alliance spokesperson Greg Barns SC said.
The Guardian
25-06-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Contempt proceedings against SMH and Age staff in Lattouf case ‘probably doomed', Nine's lawyers argue
A request by pro-Israel lobbyists to launch contempt proceedings against editors and reporters from Nine for allegedly breaching a suppression order in Antoinette Lattouf's unlawful termination case is 'probably doomed', Nine's lawyers have argued in the federal court. The editors of the Sydney Morning Herald and the Age, Bevan Shields and Patrick Elligett, are among eight individuals, including lawyers, named in the request. The pro-Israel lobby group have alleged the newspapers breached a suppression order in Lattouf's unlawful termination case against the ABC in four articles, the court heard. The suppression order was made to protect pro-Israel individuals who had contacted the ABC to complain about Lattouf's employment. The hearing on Wednesday began immediately after Rangiah had found Lattouf was unlawfully sacked by the ABC after an 'orchestrated campaign by pro-Israel lobbyists'. Nine's lawyer Tom Blackburn SC told the hearing that the primary article in dispute was not in breach of the suppression order because it was published months before Lattouf took legal action, and therefore had no connection to the case. The article, written by Michael Bachelard and Calum Jaspan in January 2024, exposed a coordinated campaign to have Lattouf removed from the ABC. The court heard the names of people who had complained to the ABC about Lattouf were removed from the article in March, after Lattouf's trial took place in February. Blackburn told the court that Nine newspapers were never told the identities of the the nine people – who were part of the 157 members of the Lawyers for Israel group – named in the suppression order. 'We didn't know which ones were applicants,' Blackburn said. 'We couldn't be expected to just pull the articles down. 'Any contempt prosecution is very probably doomed, because the registrar would have to think we knew the identities of the protected parties.' Sue Chrysanthou SC, acting for the pro-Israel group, said that the registrar should prosecute the application for contempt to demonstrate the importance of such orders. Chrysanthou reminded the court that the order was made on the grounds of safety for her clients. She pointed to an article published in the Australian which detailed how those named had faced 'death threats'. The court heard four articles were in dispute – three of which were published before the suppression order was imposed by the court. One article was published by the Nine-owned Pedestrian. Chrysanthou argued one article, which was published the day the suppression order was made, was in breach of the order because it had an embedded hyperlink to an earlier story that had named her clients. She said that link was removed after her instructing solicitor contacted the journalist, Jaspan. The court heard that the article was then amended. The update included that members of the pro-Israel lobby had had their names suppressed. Chrysanthou argued this amendment showed Jaspan and his editors understood the 'import of the orders'. Crysanthou told the court that over half a dozen letters were sent to the Nine papers claiming they were in breach of the order, but they received no reply. 'No acknowledgment of receipt, no response, nothing,' she told the court. Blackburn said the lawyers acting on behalf of the pro-Israel group failed to inform them in these letters the exact identities of who fell under a suppression order, and also referred to a 'male' as one individual under the order. Blackburn argued the mention of a male cast 'further doubt' over claims the story breached a suppression order, given the lawyers from Nine were aware the suppression order related to nine Jewish women. The hearing will continue on 18 July.
Daily Telegraph
24-06-2025
- Politics
- Daily Telegraph
Court D-Day arrives for Antoinette Lattouf over ABC sacking
Don't miss out on the headlines from Breaking News. Followed categories will be added to My News. Journalist Antoinette Lattouf will today learn her fate after she sued the ABC over their decision to take her from the air in the wake of a series of pro-Palestine social media posts. Ms Lattouf sued the ABC in the Federal Court after she was sent home for the final two days of a five-day stint on ABC Radio's Sydney Mornings program in the lead up to Christmas in 2023. Ms Lattouf was called up as a fill-in host for five shifts starting on Monday, December 18, but was told not to come in for the final two shows. She had claimed she was unlawfully dismissed after sharing a post on social media by Human Rights Watch reading: 'HRW reporting starvation as a tool of war. 'The Israeli government is using starvation of civilians as a weapon of war in Gaza' She says that she was sacked after sharing the post about the Israel-Gaza war and as a result of a flurry of emails from pro-Israel supporters. Justice Darryl Rangiah is due to hand down his findings in the Federal Court on Wednesday morning. The ABC argued that Ms Lattouf's employment was not terminated and that when she was told that she was not required to appear on air on Thursday, December 21 and Friday, December 22, it was not motivated by her political opinions. Antoinette Lattouf sued the ABC for unlawful termination. Picture: NewsWire/Flavio Brancaleone. Ms Lattouf's legal team argued that she was rendered 'pretty much unemployable' as a result of the saga having been accused of misconduct by the ABC. She argues that she suffered 'significant pain, hurt, humiliation and distress as a result of the egregious treatment meted out to her by the ABC' and that her 'reputation was sullied'. Ms Lattouf was asking the court for $100,000 to $150,000 for non-economic loss. In the Federal Court her legal team alleged former ABC chair Ita Buttrose, then-managing director David Anderson and head of content Chris Oliver-Taylor made the decision to axe her after receiving a host of complaints about her pro-Palestinian politics. During the blockbuster trial, the court heard that Ms Buttrose fired off an email to managing editor David Anderson on Tuesday, December 19. 'Has Antoinette been replaced. I am over getting emails about her,' Ms Buttrose said in the email. Former ABC chair Ita Buttrose. Picture: NewsWire / Nikki Short During her evidence, Ms Buttrose denied that this was proof that she wanted Ms Lattouf fired. 'If I wanted somebody removed, I'd be franker than that,' Ms Buttrose told the court at the time. The court heard that Mr Anderson replied: 'Antoinette will finish up on Friday. It's a managed exit given the situation. I can explain more tomorrow.' Ms Buttrose followed it up with another email at 9.59pm: 'I have a whole clutch more of complaints. Why can't she come down with flu? Or Covid. Or a stomach upset? We owe her nothing, we are copping criticism because she wasn't honest when she was appointed. 'Managed exit. Really. 'I don't like emailing you late but I am wrapping present. We should be in damage control not managed exits David.' Ex-ABC managing director David Anderson. Picture: NewsWire / Nikki Short Much of the case centred on what Ms Lattouf was told in a telephone conversation with her boss, then ABC Radio Sydney content director Elizabeth Green, on the afternoon of Monday December 18 – the day of the first of her five shifts. Ms Green told the court that she told Ms Lattouf: 'Obviously as an ABC presenter, you need to be impartial, that includes on social media. I wouldn't give anyone any ammunition for complaints, so would be best if you don't post anything related to the Israel/Palestine situation on social media while you're with us.' While Ms Lattouf told the court that she was told by Ms Green: 'It's probably best that you keep a low profile on Twitter and maybe don't tweet anything.' The court heard that following the discovery of some of Ms Lattouf's social media posts, Mr Oliver-Taylor texted Mr Anderson on Wednesday, December 20 saying that Ms Lattouf had: 'breached our editorial policies while in our employment. 'She also failed to follow a direction from her producer not to post anything while working with the ABC. As a result of this, I have no option but to stand her down.' Ms Lattout was paid for all five shifts. 'On Wednesday, 20 December 2023, Ms Lattouf was advised that she would not be required to present on Thursday, 21 December 2023 and Friday, 22 December 2023, being the last two shifts of the engagement,' the ABC's lawyers said in its submissions to the court. 'That is, the ABC altered the work that Ms Lattouf was required to undertake on the last two shifts by not requiring her to undertake any work – as it was contractually expressly entitled to do.' The ABC has asked the court to dismiss Ms Lattouf's lawsuit. Originally published as Court D-Day arrives for Antoinette Lattouf over ABC sacking
Daily Mail
24-06-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Fury as Met chief Mark Rowley compares pro-Israel protesters to 'stupid' football fans after they 'waved Israeli flag' at Palestine Action demo
Sir Mark Rowley has compared two pro-Israel protesters to 'stupid' football fans after the waved an Israeli flag at a Palestine Action rally. The Met chief accused the Jewish counter-protesters of trying to 'create an incident' when they walked into the crowd in Trafalgar Square with a megaphone and flag. Trainee barrister Isaac Grand, 22, and another man, who did not want to be named, had to be bundled onto a nearby double-decker bus by officers. The duo accused Scotland Yard of 'two-tier policing', with a video showing an officer telling them they were 'winding the crowd up' and creating a breach of peace by waving an Israeli flag. But Sir Mark has hit back and compared them to a Tottenham Hotspur fan unfurling a club flag in the midst of a crowd of Arsenal supporters. He today told LBC's Nick Ferrari the pair were being 'disingenuous' with what they were saying. 'They chose to walk into the middle of the Palestine Action protest, and then reveal the Israeli flags,' Sir Mark said. 'Just as if you were a Spurs fan and walked into a middle of a bunch of Arsenal fans, on a heated local derby, and then started waving Spurs flags, the police would hoick you out of there and say 'don't be so damn stupid, you are going to start a fight'. 'And they would take them out for their own protection. It's no different to that whatsoever. It's not about two-tier policing. 'If they'd wanted to protest on the other side of the road and express their view, the officers would have facilitated that. 'But if you want to walk into the middle of something to try and create an incident, then of course we're going to try and protect you from yourselves and stop an incident growing. 'And we would do the exactly the same in the opposite. If you had a pro-Israel protest going on and a couple of Palestinian supporters walked into the middle of it and waved flags, we'd hoick them out of it as well.' Sir Mark went on to praise officers for acting with 'great common sense and pragmatism'. Mr Grand today doubled down on his comments as he phoned LBC to issue a response to Sir Mark's accusation they were 'disingenuous'. He argued they had unfurled their Israeli flag to 'prove these people can't tolerate a second opinion'. Mr Grand's pal then blared through a megaphone 'Jihadists aren't welcome here', before the duo were terrifyingly soon surrounded by 40 Palestine Action protesters. 'We are constantly harassed and somebody tries to steal our flag from us, we are assaulted at several points,' he said. 'The police watched and did absolutely nothing. About two minutes in as I'm screaming for the police to intervene in this situation, they eventually circle around us and grab us onto a bus where we are essentially detained because we are not allowed to leave. 'Whilst on the bus, we are threatened with a public order offence. I said, "how are you threatening us with a public order offence when we haven't been threatening in any such way?' He went on to admit 'it was certainly a stupid thing to do, I don't refute that' but argued: 'It is shocking to me that even though we were not acting disorderly, even though we were not acting in any way aggressive, we were the ones that were threatened with the public order offence.' It comes as footage, published by The Telegraph, showed an officer telling Mr Grand he was creating a breach of the peace. The Met police officer is heard saying: 'You are quite within your right to protest but I'm not going to let two rival groups clash. 'The two of you against 500 of them. If it was a pro-Israel group and there were two Palestine guys running through with a Palestine flag, I would do exactly the same thing.' A Met Police spokesman said: 'This was a challenging protest, which saw 13 arrests and a number of officers assaulted. 'Protesters surrounded police officers on multiple occasions, and when two counter-protesters starte d waving an Israeli flag and shouting on a megaphone, they surrounded them too. 'Officers intervened to protect the two men. They were held on an out of service bus for their own safety and not because they had committed a crime. When it was safe to do so, officers escorted them out of the area. 'As the officer explained at the time, the men had every right to protest, but it was unwise for two people to walk into a crowd of 500 people with opposing views and not expect a confrontation to follow. 'Had the situation been reversed with 500 pro-Israel supporters and two pro-Palestinian, the officers would have done the same thing.' Hundreds of protesters had gathered at Trafalgar Square on Monday in response to Home Secretary Yvette Cooper's plan to add the group to the government's list of proscribed terrorist organisations. The decision came after members last week broke into RAF Brize Norton and damaged two military planes and other 'violent' action - including one incident where two police officers were assaulted with a sledgehammer. Elsewhere at the protest, members of Palestine Action were seen clashing with police. Officers were forced to drag activists out of the crowds after they were seen scuffling with officers and shouting up close into their faces, with some wearing black face coverings or Palestinian keffiyehs. This prompted protesters to respond by pushing back, throwing water and chanting at police. The Met had been forced to deploy more than 100 officers to the rally which started at midday but quickly spilled into chaotic scenes. Officers received a barrage of verbal abuse from the crowds, with some shouting 'f*** you' and 'who do you serve?'. Other chants include 'oink oink piggy, we're going to make your lives s****y'. One demonstrator said: 'We will cause mayhem today. We're here to break and smash the system. The police will get it. We don't care.' Scotland Yard said the protest had to be finished by 3pm but demonstrators have vowed to stay 'well beyond'. One said: 'They'll have to arrest us to get rid of us. We're not leaving. This is just the start.' However, three hours after the disorder exploded onto the capital's streets, the protest had ended.
Al Bawaba
23-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Al Bawaba
Video: Destiny advises IDF soldiers to put the camera away and have fun
ALBAWABA - Controversial streamer Destiny recently sparked backlash on social media after a new video surfaced regarding his recent trip to occupied Palestine, Israel. The clip revealed Destiny advising IDF soldiers to refrain from committing war crimes against Palestinians in reference to clips of them gleefully wearing women's underwear. He said while surrounded by several Israelis, "If you wanna wear a dress and think it's funny, just don't take a video of it." Destiny further added, "People don't like seeing your war crimes, don't film yourselves in women's outfits, just put your f***ing camera away and have fun," as laughter from his listeners erupted in the background. — trippy rev (@red_leftist) June 23, 2025 The recently surfaced video sparked widespread outrage on social media, with users taking to platforms such as X (formerly known as Twitter) to voice their opinions about the controversial streamer's degratory comments about the ongoing Israeli aggression on Gaza since Oct. 7, 2023. One X user wrote, "I'm sure the irony isn't lost on a single person that DESTINY of all people is telling the IDF soldiers to not record everything because it can be used against them." Another added, "Criminals advising criminals." The controversial streamer has showcased his pro-Israel stance on multiple occasions across social media, sparking widespread hate towards him and his fans. In 2024, drama erupted between him and fellow pro-Palestine political streamer Hasan Abi after a debate about US politics and Kamala Harris. While the exact date of the video remains unclear, Destiny visited Israel in May 2025, including areas like the West Bank, where he engaged in a debate with local residents. Additionally, he documented the debate and posted it on YouTube.
