Musk Scores Free Speech Victory In Australia

Elon Musk’s social media platform X has secured a legal triumph in Australia as a court declined to extend a temporary order blocking videos depicting a stabbing incident at a Sydney church.

The Federal Court rejected a request from Australia’s online watchdog, the eSafety Commissioner, to prolong an injunction that removed posts showcasing the stabbing attack against Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel in Wakeley, Western Sydney, last month.

Under the authority vested by the Online Safety Act, the eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, had sought X’s compliance in removing approximately 60 instances of footage portraying the attack. Despite the Commissioner’s efforts, the court opted against extending the temporary order, allowing the videos to remain accessible on the platform.

The stabbing incident, occurring during a livestreamed sermon, garnered significant online viewership, sparking widespread attention. Subsequently, the eSafety Commissioner obtained a temporary legal injunction mandating X to conceal posts featuring footage of the incident. While X complied by implementing geoblocking measures, restricting access for most Australian users, it resisted the Commissioner’s demand for their global removal.

Elon Musk, in a statement posted on his platform last month, voiced concerns regarding government censorship and advocated for resistance against such actions. He emphasized the potential repercussions of permitting any single country to dictate global internet content, stressing the need to challenge censorship attempts.

“Our concern is that if ANY country is allowed to censor content for ALL countries, which is what the Australian ‘eSafety Commissar’ is demanding, then what is to stop any country from controlling the entire Internet? We have already censored the content in question for Australia, pending legal appeal, and it is stored only on servers in the USA,” he wrote.

Australia’s radical leftist Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, criticized Musk, characterizing him as an “arrogant billionaire” who purportedly believes he is exempt from the law. In response, Musk refuted the accusation, questioning the Prime Minister’s jurisdiction and defending his platform’s stance against censorship.

While Musk’s legal victory may appear modest, it represents a significant win for proponents of free speech in Australia. The country has faced scrutiny for its increasingly authoritarian measures, particularly amidst the coronavirus pandemic, when stringent lockdowns and travel restrictions prompted international condemnation.