Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Yes, I withdraw it and I'll simply say that I'm referring to false and defamatory claims in relation to two anonymous Twitter accounts, including claims that I was guilty of embezzlement and going to jail. In these Twitter accounts there was a doctored image of a mug shot. It was of another woman bearing the same name as me, who had shot dead her children in Texas, but the image was of my face. These were my political opponents at work and it was absolutely sickening and disgusting. Victoria Police is investigating this matter on the basis that these anonymous Twitter accounts constitute stalking under the Crimes Act. But, to date, police have been unable to access any identifying material about these accounts, because Twitter refuses to cooperate.

On application by Geelong detectives, the Geelong Magistrates Court issued a warrant on 10 July 2020 demanding that Twitter hand over relevant documents. On 2 September, Twitter declined to accept the warrant, saying that police must seek information through the International Cooperation in Criminal Matters Mutual Legal Assistance process in the courts of Ireland and the United States. Twitter refuses to cooperate. This makes a mockery of Twitter's assurances to me by their Australian representative Kara Hinesley that it would cooperate if a court or legal order were obtained.

This makes justice for ordinary Australians impossible. These companies don't care about publishing defamatory content, which may also be in breach of the criminal law, because it usually affects individuals who have neither the time nor the money to contest the matter in court, let alone in an international court. The companies know that under Australian law they cannot be held liable for the publication of the defamatory content anyway. That's why regulatory reform is needed to restore fairness and justice online for ordinary Australians.

Reform will be difficult and complex, because Australian law is limited in its capacity to bind foreign corporations operating overseas. But this reform is possible, and must happen, as we have done with abusive and harmful content published online. Some may argue that stronger regulation of these companies' online publishing undermines free speech, but our right to free speech does not justify the publication of defamatory material. No-one thinks it's a fair concession to free speech to allow the social media giants to escape liability, having actively participated in the ruination of someone's life and reputation.

Some may argue social media companies really don't host content in Australia because the internet is a global phenomenon that transcends national borders. If that's the case, why is it that, whenever they are brought before the courts, Twitter says its servers are all in California and Facebook maintains its data centre is in Dublin? It seems these companies are very eager to confine the internet within national borders whenever it suits them. The fact is that companies like Facebook and Twitter publish content in Australia, run advertising in Australia, conduct business in Australia and derive significant income in Australia. They also take advantage of legal loopholes in Australia. These loopholes should and must be eliminated.

The great Roman statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero said:

The precepts of the law are these: to live honestly, to injure no one, and to give everyone else his due.

Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter continue to publish dishonest and injurious defamatory content online. It is time to give Australians their due and hold these companies responsible for the damage they cause.