Court order could take ‘wrecking ball’ to press freedoms, NSW MP says

A NSW MP has condemned a court order requiring a major media company to hand over copies of its investigation to an interested party before publication, warning it set a dangerous precedent that could “take a wrecking ball” to Australia’s press freedoms.

Greens upper house MP Abigail Boyd on Tuesday night told parliament a Supreme Court order compelling The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age and 60 Minutes to hand over draft copies of an investigation into the cosmetic surgery industry threatened the future of public interest journalism.

Greens MP Abigail Boyd enters parliament.Credit: James Brickwood

“Our defamation laws are already stacked catastrophically in favour of the rich, powerful and connected,” Boyd told the Legislative Council under parliamentary privilege.

“Friday’s events in the NSW Supreme Court should concern every journalist in Australia and anyone who cares about holding corporations and powerful elites to account for egregious conduct.”

Double Bay cosmetic surgeon Joseph Ajaka and his high-profile lawyers – Sue Chrysanthou and Rebekah Giles – obtained a court order on Friday compelling Nine, the owner of those titles, to produce copies of its investigation, which was due to air last Sunday night.

However, Nine had the orders stayed pending an appeal, and agreed not to publish the material before that occurred.

Boyd said the move was unprecedented, and warned that if Nine lost its appeal, the consequences would be far-reaching.

“The floodgates will open for the rich and powerful to wield the powers of the court if they suspect they will not like the story being told about them,” she said.

“If permitted, the precedent that would be set would take a wrecking ball to the already fragile foundations of our media and press freedoms.

“If this order is upheld, it would send a chilling shock wave through the public interest journalism world, to the detriment of our democracy and to the benefit of the rich and powerful.”

Barrister Dauid Sibtain, acting for Nine, told the court last Friday an order compelling a publisher to hand over documents to the plaintiff would set a precedent that was effectively “placing every plaintiff in the position of an editor”.

Justice Stephen Rothman, who had not seen the draft content, said he accepted there was a possibility that the level of damage to Ajaka and his Cosmos Clinic that could potentially arise from whatever might be in the upcoming publications might be “so great” and irreversible that it was necessary for the draft content to be handed over.

Boyd said previous reporting had found “dangerous and unhygienic practices” occurring inside other cosmetic surgery clinics, and the industry needed reform.

“Ajaka may have a lot to lose if he cannot control what is said about him, but we all have a lot more to lose if journalists are prevented from speaking truth to power,” she told parliament.

Our Breaking News Alert will notify you of significant breaking news when it happens. Get it here.