Ekermawi v Jones (No 3)

In Ekermawi v Jones (No 3), the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal was asked to determine whether a radio broadcaster, Mr Jones, had racially vilified a group of people by reading out an email on his breakfast radio show that contained offensive comments about Arabs. The applicant, Mr Ekermawi, argued that the broadcast constituted racial vilification under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977, and sought damages, an apology, and an order for the respondents to refrain from future similar conduct. The respondents, Mr Jones and Harbour Radio Pty Ltd, denied the allegations and argued that the comments were not made with the intention to incite hatred or contempt.

The primary legal issue for the Tribunal was to interpret the meaning of the racial vilification provisions within the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine whether the email read out by Mr Jones constituted conduct that was "likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people who are identified by reference to their race". The Tribunal also needed to consider whether the broadcast was done with the requisite intention, which was to incite hatred or contempt towards the group of people identified by reference to their race.

The Tribunal found that the email read out by Mr Jones did constitute racial vilification under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977. The Tribunal accepted that the email contained offensive comments about Arabs and that the broadcast was likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people who were identified by reference to their race. The Tribunal also found that Mr Jones intended to incite hatred or contempt towards the group of people identified by reference to their race. The Tribunal ordered that the respondents pay damages to the applicant in the sum of $10,000 and that Mr Jones publish an apology on Radio 2GB. The Tribunal refused both parties' applications for costs.

The Tribunal's decision highlights the importance of carefully considering the potential impact of one's words and actions, particularly in the media. The Tribunal found that Mr Jones's conduct constituted racial vilification, even though he did not intend to offend or insult anyone. The decision also underscores the need for broadcasters and other media outlets to be aware of their obligations under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977, and to take steps to ensure that their conduct does not constitute racial vilification.