South Australia Outlaws Anonymous Political Speech

Sabriel writes "If you're online in South Australia and want to comment about the upcoming state election, be prepared to hand over your real name and postcode first — because this month it becomes illegal to do so anonymously (even under a pseudonym). Media organizations must keep your details on file for six months and face 'fines of $5000 if they do not hand over this information to the Electoral Commissioner.' This abomination was passed with the support of both major parties (Labour and Liberal), and to quote its sponsor, Attorney-General Michael Atkinson, 'There is no impinging on freedom of speech, people are free to say what they wish as themselves, not as somebody else.' Apparently incapable of targeting a few impostors without resorting to 'nuke it from orbit' legislative tactics, Atkinson has forgotten that protecting anonymity is important to the democratic process; hopefully both major parties will get a reminder come the polls on March 20."

Comments

Re:I'm not Australian but...

[TheSpoom]

I think the right to be anonymous is more important than knowing who said what. You just know that the politicians put this law in place so that they could harass or politically destroy those who would speak against them. It's a "strategic *law* against public participation".

Censorship is the road to fascism.

Re:Obligatory Soviet Russia joke:

[L4t3r4lu5]

When everyone is a criminal, crime is commonplace.

Stop working and go steal stuff. What do you have to lose?

N.B. This is not legal advice.

Re:I'm not Australian but...

[clone53421]

No, I don’t.

If a cop says I turned left at an intersection where there’s a sign saying “no left turn”, I’m guilty unless proven innocent. They don’t even have to reveal their tape footage from the car showing whether or not I actually did.

Innocent until proven guilty is a pathetic lie that’s maintained to placate us.

Re:I'm not Australian but...

[icebraining]

Nor does this law criminalize any of the things these suddenly non-anonymous posters will say.

No, it'll just make them sure that now they'll be identified and possibly "stopped" by those who don't appreciate their positions.

Your boss is a militant for party X? You'd better don't say anything bad about them, or you'll find yourself out of a job.

1995 US Supreme Court precedent in support of anonymity:

* "... Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority."
        * "... the most effective advocates have sometimes opted for anonymity."
        * "... the interest in having anonymous works enter the marketplace of ideas unquestionably outweighs any public interest in requiring disclosure as a condition of entry."
        * "Anonymity thereby provides a way for a writer who may be personally unpopular to ensure that readers will not prejudge her message simply because they do not like its proponent."
        * "This tradition [of anonymity] is perhaps best exemplified by the secret ballot, the hard won right to vote one's conscience without fear of retaliation."
        * "Of course, the identity of the source is helpful in evaluating ideas. But `the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market` (Abrams v. United States, [250 U.S. 616, 630 (1919) (Holmes, J., dissenting)]). Do not underestimate the common man. People are intelligent enough to evaluate the source of an anonymous writing. They can see it is anonymous. They know it is anonymous. They can evaluate its anonymity along with its message, as long as they are permitted, as they must be, to read that message. And then, once they have done so, it is for them to decide what is `responsible`, what is valuable, and what is truth."

http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/93-986.ZO.html

Re:Australian citizens, PLEASE do the right thing.

[Reziac]

Here's a question for you:

If democracy works so well, why is it devolving into this same sort of scenario everywhere we look?

If democracy works so well, why are we now in the position of having to vote the bastards out? how did they get voted in to start with??