Tribune (Sydney, NSW : 1939 - 1991) Tue 28 Nov 1972 Page 4.
SYDNEY: "There is no separate law for television
stations and for Mr. Mundey ... If the statements are
dearly and beyond all reasonable1 doubt contemptuous,
having regard to what happened before — and I
emphasis ir — it was highly improper for any tele
vision station to broadcast them ... To disseminate
Mich remarks creates a damage which is far beyond
the remarks made to the few people outside die
court . . .
Judge Hope said this at one point in the hearing
of a "contempt of court" charge against Mr. J. B.
Mundey (NSW secretary of the Australian Construc
tion Employees & Builders Laborers Federation) over
statements by Mr. Mundey in a TV interview which
took place after a court case.
Mr. Mundey was charged with contempt by the
Attorney-General in the Askin Government. The court
was told1 in the course of the "contempt" hearing that
the Attorney-General did not intend to take "contempt"
proceedings against TV persons involved.
A leaflet issued recently by the Defend Jack Mundey
Committee gave the names and addresses of over 550
persons who had signed a declaration that the charge
against Mr. Mundey is a political act and repeating
the substance of the statements over which Mr. Mundey
has been charged.
The leaflet, which pointed to environmental stands
by the Builders Laborers, said that "the Developers
Lobby and their friends—headed by Sir Robert
Askin, Mr. P. Coleman and the Liberal Party—want
to get rid of Jack Mundey . . ."
The statements over which Mr. Mundey was charged
followed' the sentencing on August 23 of Mr. R. Pringle
(State president of the Builders Laborers) and iron
worker J. Phillips — who have since appealed — for
having damaged goalposts at the Sydney Cricket Ground
in an anti-apartheid protest before a Springbok match
last year.
In an ABC telecast of an August 23 interview out
side the court, Mr. Mundey used the phrase "a miscar
riage of justice" and referred to the judge in the
Pringle-Phillips case (Judge Head) as a "racist".
Evidence was given in the "contempt" hearing that
the ABC film had been edited1 before being telecast
and not all the interview was shown.
After several days of hearing, Judge Hope last week
reserved his decision on the contempt charge.
At one point when, he was giving evidence last week,
Mr. Mundey said that in the Pringle-Phillips case
there had been sharp clashes between the defence
counsel and the judge about the question of the union's
decision on apartheid and international sporting orga-
nisations' decision on it.
To a layman's way of thinking, he said, the judge
was concerned only with two hacksaws and two goal
posts: "it seemed to me that the emotion-charged
atmosphere that led to the motivation of these two
people cutting the goal posts was completely ignored
and divorced from the actual court proceedings."
Mr. Mundey said that he had seen the real issue in
the Pringle-Phillips case to be a question of racism,
"that the Australian Rugby Union and the Government
had played host to an all-white Rugby Union team in
the face of world opinion."
He said, too: "I felt it was not a case of two larrikins
sawing down goal posts; it was a case of two men
who felt strongly about apartheid and about the
presence of the Springboks, who attempted to highlite
public opinion and, in fact, to prevent the game taktog
Mr. Mundey said that the telecast film had quoted
him as referring to the "deeply ingrained racism" in
our society. In a section not telecast, he had gone on
to say that we ourselves of the industrial working
class, while not able to influence all strata in society
had a very big problem to overcome racism among
workers.
He said that his statement was made in the context
of an overall examination of racism, and was not
aimed at any one person, including the judge.
Under cross-examination by Mr. D. F. Rofe (for
the Attorney-General), Mr. Mundey was asked about
his telecast statement in the interview that
"I think the main purpose of the industrial action by
the workershere this morning, the spontaneous action of work
ers walking off jobs, stopped the racist judge sending
those two men to jail ..."
Mr. Rofe: Did you not have a part in organising
this group of workers to go to court that morning?
Mr. Mundey: There was no organisation from the
union as such. If such organisation was carried out
there would have been thousands of workers at the
court.
Asked by Mr. Rofe in what way he believed that
the action or presence of the group of men in court
would influence the judge, Mr. Mundey replied:
"No body lives in sweet isolation, nobody lives
in a vacuum, and public interest is of immense concern
to all people regardless of the position they hold."
He said also: "I think that all people are influenced
by public concern, public participation."
In re-examination by Mr. Lusher QC (for Mr.
Mundey), these passages occurred in relation to Mr.
Mundey's August 23 statements:—
Mr. Lusher: Did you have any intention of scandalis
ing the court?
Mr. Mundey: None whatsover.
Mr. Lusher: Or influencing any appeal?
Mr. Mundey: Of course not.
Mr. Lusher: Did you have any knowledge of the
law of contempt at that point of time or, if so, what
knowledge did you have?
Mr. Mundey: I have a slightly better one now
(Laughter).
Mr. Mundey went on to say: "My belief at the
time was that, once the case was ovejr, I was free
to comment on that case. . ."
Seldom photographed together:
Jack Mundey takes over the microphone
during question time at a recent election meeting in
Prime Minister McMahon's electorate of Lowe,
while Billy takes a back seat.
SYDNEY: "There is no separate law for television
stations and for Mr. Mundey ... If the statements are
dearly and beyond all reasonable1 doubt contemptuous,
having regard to what happened before — and I
emphasis ir — it was highly improper for any tele
vision station to broadcast them ... To disseminate
Mich remarks creates a damage which is far beyond
the remarks made to the few people outside die
court . . .
Judge Hope said this at one point in the hearing
of a "contempt of court" charge against Mr. J. B.
Mundey (NSW secretary of the Australian Construc
tion Employees & Builders Laborers Federation) over
statements by Mr. Mundey in a TV interview which
took place after a court case.
Mr. Mundey was charged with contempt by the
Attorney-General in the Askin Government. The court
was told1 in the course of the "contempt" hearing that
the Attorney-General did not intend to take "contempt"
proceedings against TV persons involved.
A leaflet issued recently by the Defend Jack Mundey
Committee gave the names and addresses of over 550
persons who had signed a declaration that the charge
against Mr. Mundey is a political act and repeating
the substance of the statements over which Mr. Mundey
has been charged.
The leaflet, which pointed to environmental stands
by the Builders Laborers, said that "the Developers
Lobby and their friends—headed by Sir Robert
Askin, Mr. P. Coleman and the Liberal Party—want
to get rid of Jack Mundey . . ."
The statements over which Mr. Mundey was charged
followed' the sentencing on August 23 of Mr. R. Pringle
(State president of the Builders Laborers) and iron
worker J. Phillips — who have since appealed — for
having damaged goalposts at the Sydney Cricket Ground
in an anti-apartheid protest before a Springbok match
last year.
In an ABC telecast of an August 23 interview out
side the court, Mr. Mundey used the phrase "a miscar
riage of justice" and referred to the judge in the
Pringle-Phillips case (Judge Head) as a "racist".
Evidence was given in the "contempt" hearing that
the ABC film had been edited1 before being telecast
and not all the interview was shown.
After several days of hearing, Judge Hope last week
reserved his decision on the contempt charge.
At one point when, he was giving evidence last week,
Mr. Mundey said that in the Pringle-Phillips case
there had been sharp clashes between the defence
counsel and the judge about the question of the union's
decision on apartheid and international sporting orga-
nisations' decision on it.
To a layman's way of thinking, he said, the judge
was concerned only with two hacksaws and two goal
posts: "it seemed to me that the emotion-charged
atmosphere that led to the motivation of these two
people cutting the goal posts was completely ignored
and divorced from the actual court proceedings."
Mr. Mundey said that he had seen the real issue in
the Pringle-Phillips case to be a question of racism,
"that the Australian Rugby Union and the Government
had played host to an all-white Rugby Union team in
the face of world opinion."
He said, too: "I felt it was not a case of two larrikins
sawing down goal posts; it was a case of two men
who felt strongly about apartheid and about the
presence of the Springboks, who attempted to highlite
public opinion and, in fact, to prevent the game taktog
Mr. Mundey said that the telecast film had quoted
him as referring to the "deeply ingrained racism" in
our society. In a section not telecast, he had gone on
to say that we ourselves of the industrial working
class, while not able to influence all strata in society
had a very big problem to overcome racism among
workers.
He said that his statement was made in the context
of an overall examination of racism, and was not
aimed at any one person, including the judge.
Under cross-examination by Mr. D. F. Rofe (for
the Attorney-General), Mr. Mundey was asked about
his telecast statement in the interview that
"I think the main purpose of the industrial action by
the workershere this morning, the spontaneous action of work
ers walking off jobs, stopped the racist judge sending
those two men to jail ..."
Mr. Rofe: Did you not have a part in organising
this group of workers to go to court that morning?
Mr. Mundey: There was no organisation from the
union as such. If such organisation was carried out
there would have been thousands of workers at the
court.
Asked by Mr. Rofe in what way he believed that
the action or presence of the group of men in court
would influence the judge, Mr. Mundey replied:
"No body lives in sweet isolation, nobody lives
in a vacuum, and public interest is of immense concern
to all people regardless of the position they hold."
He said also: "I think that all people are influenced
by public concern, public participation."
In re-examination by Mr. Lusher QC (for Mr.
Mundey), these passages occurred in relation to Mr.
Mundey's August 23 statements:—
Mr. Lusher: Did you have any intention of scandalis
ing the court?
Mr. Mundey: None whatsover.
Mr. Lusher: Or influencing any appeal?
Mr. Mundey: Of course not.
Mr. Lusher: Did you have any knowledge of the
law of contempt at that point of time or, if so, what
knowledge did you have?
Mr. Mundey: I have a slightly better one now
(Laughter).
Mr. Mundey went on to say: "My belief at the
time was that, once the case was ovejr, I was free
to comment on that case. . ."
Seldom photographed together:
Jack Mundey takes over the microphone
during question time at a recent election meeting in
Prime Minister McMahon's electorate of Lowe,
while Billy takes a back seat.
No comments:
Post a Comment