Page:Faruqi v Hanson (2024, FCA).pdf/46

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

and wealth of colonised peoples), then she should go somewhere else. I said the words "back to Pakistan" because that's where she happened to be from. If she were from the UK, I would have said "piss off back to the UK". If she were from New Zealand, I would have said "piss off back to New Zealand". If she were born in Australia, I would have said "piss off somewhere else" or chosen a country that I thought fit what she was saying and said "piss off" there.

I believed that it didn't matter whether a person saying disgraceful things about Australia was from here or not. I believed that whether you were lucky enough to be born here or lucky enough to be able to move your life here, you should be loyal to and grateful for Australia. I believed that Australia is a beautiful, prosperous and successful country. I did not believe that it was part of a racist empire. My belief was that if you – a migrant or someone born here – are not happy in this country, you should go and find a country that suits you.

177 Senator Hanson said that she believed that what she said in her tweet was true and that it was an honest expression of her beliefs. She also said that she thought that Senator Faruqi would "take my criticism on the chin."

178 Senator Hanson said that she considered the death of the Queen to be a matter of public interest, and Senator Faruqi's tweet and views about the matter to also be a matter of public interest.

Cross-examination and credit

179 I have considerable doubt about whether Senator Hanson gave the wording of her tweet the thought that she said that she did in her affidavit. That is because in cross-examination she said that she immediately dictated the tweet to her staff on seeing Senator Faruqi's tweet. She was feeling distraught, disgusted and angry. She did not get a draft back from her staff, consider the words or weigh them. She just dictated the tweet and sent it. (T156:20-43.) I will return to this when I consider whether the para (b) requirements are established.

180 Senator Hanson accepted that telling Senator Faruqi to "piss of back to Pakistan" was another way of telling her to go back to where she came from (T158:33).

181 Senator Hanson was an argumentative witness who often did not answer the question put to her and did not accept obvious truths. The following are some examples that support that assessment.

182 Senator Hanson was played a recording of her having said that she would not sell her house to a Muslim. She was asked whether she had heard herself say that, to which she argumentatively replied that it was irrelevant because she had not sold her house – clearly the issue at stake was not what she had done but what she had said. She ultimately accepted that she had said it, but she would not say whether she had meant it. (See T137:43-138:30.)


Faruqi v Hanson [2024] FCA 1264
39