Focus on the BIG picture.
Thursday, Apr 03, 2025
Outside the box.
Legal Loophole Permits Misleading Political Advertisements in Australia
Misleading images concerning candidates are legally permissible outside formal campaign periods, raising concerns over electoral integrity.
A gap in Australia’s Electoral Act permits the dissemination of misleading political advertisements outside of official election campaign periods.
This loophole has raised significant concerns among experts regarding its impact on both the reputations of candidates and the electoral process as a whole.
In 2022, David Pocock, an independent senator in the Australian Capital Territory, lodged a formal complaint with the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) concerning a digitally altered image of himself that was circulated after the date for the election had been established.
The image depicted Pocock tearing open his shirt to reveal the logo of the Greens party, and it appeared on roadside signs as well as on vehicles near polling locations.
This campaign was authorized by the conservative lobby group Advance Australia.
The AEC ruled that the image was misleading, stating it should not have been displayed during the election cycle.
Advance Australia contested this assessment but ultimately agreed to refrain from showing the image during the campaign period.
As of March 31, 2023, the official writs for the upcoming 2025 Federal Election were issued, marking the initiation of election campaigning.
In February 2023, ahead of this election, Advance Australia distributed a similar digitally altered image featuring a new candidate, independent Alex Dyson.
This flyer also showed Dyson ripping open his shirt to reveal a T-shirt with the official logo of the Greens party.
Dyson commented on the mixed reactions the image elicited, noting that some individuals were shocked by the portrayal once they realized it was released by Advance Australia, while others, potentially unable to read the small print, reacted with dismay for different reasons.
Yee-Fui Ng, an associate professor at Monash Law School, indicated that Advance Australia has identified a loophole in the electoral regulations.
An Advance Australia spokesperson asserted that the AEC had advised them that the material featuring Dyson did not transgress electoral law.
Section 329 of the Electoral Act specifically prohibits the publication of materials likely to mislead or deceive voters, but this restriction comes into effect only once the writs for an election have been issued.
The Director of the Australia Institute’s Democracy and Accountability Program, Bill Browne, commented that it ultimately falls to the viewer to determine what constitutes misleading information regarding political advertisements.
This loophole has raised significant concerns among experts regarding its impact on both the reputations of candidates and the electoral process as a whole.
In 2022, David Pocock, an independent senator in the Australian Capital Territory, lodged a formal complaint with the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) concerning a digitally altered image of himself that was circulated after the date for the election had been established.
The image depicted Pocock tearing open his shirt to reveal the logo of the Greens party, and it appeared on roadside signs as well as on vehicles near polling locations.
This campaign was authorized by the conservative lobby group Advance Australia.
The AEC ruled that the image was misleading, stating it should not have been displayed during the election cycle.
Advance Australia contested this assessment but ultimately agreed to refrain from showing the image during the campaign period.
As of March 31, 2023, the official writs for the upcoming 2025 Federal Election were issued, marking the initiation of election campaigning.
In February 2023, ahead of this election, Advance Australia distributed a similar digitally altered image featuring a new candidate, independent Alex Dyson.
This flyer also showed Dyson ripping open his shirt to reveal a T-shirt with the official logo of the Greens party.
Dyson commented on the mixed reactions the image elicited, noting that some individuals were shocked by the portrayal once they realized it was released by Advance Australia, while others, potentially unable to read the small print, reacted with dismay for different reasons.
Yee-Fui Ng, an associate professor at Monash Law School, indicated that Advance Australia has identified a loophole in the electoral regulations.
An Advance Australia spokesperson asserted that the AEC had advised them that the material featuring Dyson did not transgress electoral law.
Section 329 of the Electoral Act specifically prohibits the publication of materials likely to mislead or deceive voters, but this restriction comes into effect only once the writs for an election have been issued.
The Director of the Australia Institute’s Democracy and Accountability Program, Bill Browne, commented that it ultimately falls to the viewer to determine what constitutes misleading information regarding political advertisements.
