Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
High Court of Australia has upheld the government’s decision to reject Visa to American commentator candace owensRuling that his entry could incite social division.
It also said that she could not rely on the country’s inherent right to political communication.
Ms. Owens, who makes huge claims He is being followed online for his provocative conservative viewshad planned a speaking tour sydney, melbournePerth, Adelaide and Brisbane in November 2024.
But his visa application was rejected by Australian Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke, who worried that his rhetoric could “incite discord”.
Mr Burke used his powers under the Migration Act of 1958 to refuse Ms Owens a visa. The law allows the government to deny entry to any non-citizen who fails a “character test” or poses a risk of promoting hostility.
Mr. Burke said at the time, “From downplaying the impact of the Holocaust with comments about Mengele to claims that Muslims started slavery, Candace Owens has the ability to incite discord in almost every direction.” news.com.au,
“Australia’s national interest is best served when Candace Owens is elsewhere.”
Ms. Owens challenged the decision, arguing that it violated constitutional freedom of political communication.
Unlike the US, Australia has no express constitutional right to freedom of expression, although courts recognize an implicit freedom for political discussion among citizens.
In a unanimous decision on Wednesday, the High Court rejected Ms Owens’ appeal and ordered her to pay the government’s legal costs.
The court ruled that although the Migration Act imposed some limits on political communications, it served the legitimate purpose of protecting national unity.
“Inherent freedoms are not ‘individual rights,’ not unlimited and not absolute,” Justices Stephen Gageler, Michelle Gordon and Robert Beech-Jones said in a joint decision.
Justice Simon Steward argued that Ms Owens, as a foreigner, could not rely on constitutional protections reserved for Australian citizens. He said, “At least, while outside Australia, he has no right to invoke the protection provided by the inherent freedom or to use it as a means of entry.” “It just doesn’t apply to him.”
Justice Jacqueline Gleeson said that given his extensive online presence, his exclusion would not deprive Australians of political discussion. “It is notorious that political engagement is increasing exponentially through social media,” he said, noting that Ms. Owens’ followers can still access her views digitally.
In a separate ruling, Justice James Edelman said Ms Owens’s legal arguments “should be emphatically rejected”, confirming that the Home Secretary’s interpretation of the law was correct.
The decision came after Jewish groups called for Ms Owens to be barred from entering Australia, citing her alleged history of inflammatory comments. The Australian Jewish Executive Council, for one, warned that his visit risked giving rise to “racist and bigoted comments about Jews and other vulnerable groups”.
The ruling against Ms Owens came after the government revoked a visa for American rapper Ye, formerly Kanye West, over concerns that his music and public statements glorified Nazi ideology.
Ms Owens has long been accused of promoting conspiracy theories, such as suggesting France’s first lady Brigitte Macron was male by birth – This allegation is now subject to defamation proceedings by the President Emmanuel Macron In American courts.