The decision by Judith Collins to sue Trevor Mallard, Andrew Little and Radio New Zealand for defamation must be leaving her National Party colleagues shaking their heads.
It is a highly risky move, because if Collins backs down or loses her case, it will potentially destroy her ministerial career.
The ACC scandal seems to be growing bigger and bigger. It's too early to say that the stink rising up from this mess will bring the government down, but it has the potential to do considerable harm to National.
It it also astounding that Collins would sue a media outlet over this matter. If she and her colleagues had any self-awareness, they would understand that since the "teapot tape" affair the media have turned against John Key's government. Regardless of Collins' real motives behind the lawsuit against Radio New Zealand, her actions are bound to be viewed as just another example of National trying to silence the media.
I'm not the defamation law guy (I'm sure Mr Price or Mr Edwards will be along soon), but it's not entirely clear to me that anything defamatory has been said by either Mallard or Little about Collins. On the other hand, given Collins' litigious frame of mind, I'm not inclined to repeat anything they said that could potentially be construed as defamatory.
Additionally, the defendants will have potential defences available to them. Moreover, Mallard and Little might use the absolute privilege afforded to legal proceedings as a means of throwing more muck at Collins.
And if Collins wins, what then? I'm not convinced she'll get an apology from Mallard or Little, and it's unclear whether she would get a substantial damages award over remarks that seem largely innocuous.
Even if Collins wins she may lose.
Thursday, March 29, 2012
3 comments:
I welcome comments, but I ask commenters to follow a few simple rules:
1. I delete anonymous comments. Please use either a name or moniker. I am not asking anyone to reveal their secret identity. Just don't call yourself "Anonymous".
2. Please don't abuse or defame others.
3. Moronic or nonsensical comments may be deleted.
4. I don't often exercise the heavy hand of censorship, but I do reserve the right to delete any comment I don't like, for any reason.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Here's a comma, it would fit nicely into the title of the post just after "earth".
ReplyDeleteAnd no, she is not.
Hmmm, I must find out when Collins was handed the Questions that were to be asked of her in Parliament today.
ReplyDeleteIf she knew in advance what would be asked of her, taking legal action would give her an "out" for not answering questions in the House, that might be embarressing, or risking misleading Parliament. (A huge No-No in Parliamentland.)
I suspect that, because Ministers are handed copies of questions to be asked of them in the House, that gave her time to launch her lawsuit for defamation.
Result: she can duck questions citing that the matter is now before the Courts. (I'm sure Mr Price or Mr Edwards can offer their own insights into my overly-suspicious views...)
The questions for ministers must be lodged with clerk of the house by a certain time. Around 1pm (lunch-time) the questions are released to political parties to prepare responses & supplementary questions.
ReplyDeleteThe questions are vaguely worded so as to prevent a full-scale response or non-response. depending on how political the question. the questions appear on the order paper in the order they are received at the clerk's office.
At 2pm the house sits & the fun begins ...
well that is what happened when we worked at parliament - just 2 years ago.. unless things have changed ...
diana and friends