Focus on the BIG picture.
Sunday, Mar 02, 2025
Outside the box.
Judge Questions ABC's Justification for Dismissal of Antoinette Lattouf
Case focuses on political opinion and social media policies following the dismissal of a pro-Palestinian radio host.
In the ongoing case surrounding the dismissal of journalist Antoinette Lattouf, Justice Darryl Rangiah of the Federal Court has expressed skepticism regarding the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's (ABC) rationale for her removal from the airwaves.
Lattouf was dismissed after sharing a post from Human Rights Watch on social media that characterized Israel's actions in Gaza as using starvation as a 'weapon of war.' This action followed a three-day engagement as a fill-in host for ABC Radio Sydney's Mornings program.
Lattouf has filed a lawsuit against the ABC in the Fair Work Commission, seeking penalties and damages for what she claims is unlawful dismissal, alleging that her political views and race influenced the decision.
During hearings, ABC barrister Ian Neil maintained that former chief content officer Chris Oliver-Taylor resolved to remove Lattouf for purportedly breaching a directive against discussing the Israel-Gaza conflict on social media.
However, Lattouf has contended that no explicit order was issued.
Elizabeth Green, her direct supervisor, clarified that she merely advised Lattouf to refrain from posting about the topic, rather than issuing a strict directive.
Justice Rangiah questioned the strength of the ABC's case, inquiring about the basis of a 'rather flimsy reason' for her removal.
He noted that the argument suggesting potential bias from Lattouf's social media activity appeared weak.
Neil, representing the ABC, argued that Lattouf’s social media presence could create a perception of bias, which warranted her dismissal.
The judge also highlighted inconsistencies in the ABC's management of the situation, suggesting that once it was established there was no blanket order against Lattouf’s social media activity, the decision to remove her could have been reconsidered.
Lattouf's legal team has argued that her dismissal was influenced by complaints from pro-Israel lobbyists directed toward ABC’s senior management, alleging that pressure from these groups led to her being let go under the guise of policy violations.
Neil countered that the ABC's actions were within their rights as Lattouf, a casual employee, had no guaranteed entitlement to continued shifts.
As the case progresses, the ABC has disclosed that it has incurred approximately $1.1 million in legal expenses in defending against Lattouf's claims, following unsuccessful attempts to achieve a settlement.
Justice Rangiah has since reserved his decision, pending further deliberation.
Lattouf was dismissed after sharing a post from Human Rights Watch on social media that characterized Israel's actions in Gaza as using starvation as a 'weapon of war.' This action followed a three-day engagement as a fill-in host for ABC Radio Sydney's Mornings program.
Lattouf has filed a lawsuit against the ABC in the Fair Work Commission, seeking penalties and damages for what she claims is unlawful dismissal, alleging that her political views and race influenced the decision.
During hearings, ABC barrister Ian Neil maintained that former chief content officer Chris Oliver-Taylor resolved to remove Lattouf for purportedly breaching a directive against discussing the Israel-Gaza conflict on social media.
However, Lattouf has contended that no explicit order was issued.
Elizabeth Green, her direct supervisor, clarified that she merely advised Lattouf to refrain from posting about the topic, rather than issuing a strict directive.
Justice Rangiah questioned the strength of the ABC's case, inquiring about the basis of a 'rather flimsy reason' for her removal.
He noted that the argument suggesting potential bias from Lattouf's social media activity appeared weak.
Neil, representing the ABC, argued that Lattouf’s social media presence could create a perception of bias, which warranted her dismissal.
The judge also highlighted inconsistencies in the ABC's management of the situation, suggesting that once it was established there was no blanket order against Lattouf’s social media activity, the decision to remove her could have been reconsidered.
Lattouf's legal team has argued that her dismissal was influenced by complaints from pro-Israel lobbyists directed toward ABC’s senior management, alleging that pressure from these groups led to her being let go under the guise of policy violations.
Neil countered that the ABC's actions were within their rights as Lattouf, a casual employee, had no guaranteed entitlement to continued shifts.
As the case progresses, the ABC has disclosed that it has incurred approximately $1.1 million in legal expenses in defending against Lattouf's claims, following unsuccessful attempts to achieve a settlement.
Justice Rangiah has since reserved his decision, pending further deliberation.
