The defamation action running in the ACT Supreme Court is taking on some of the characteristics of films made by actors of the same name as the plaintiffs.
On Wednesday former Labor Foreign Minister and Governor-General Bill Mr Hayden appeared as a witness in a defamation case brought by Treasurer Peter Costello, Employment Services Minister Tony Abbott and their wives. He told the court about the damage false sexual smears could do, using detailed examples of false rumours about former Prime Minister Paul Keating.
Yesterday he expressed dismay and shock at the widespread media coverage his evidence received.
What on earth did Mr Hayden expect? Presumably he was in court as an expert, giving his opinion about what effect rumours had on people’s poliltical careers, because it is difficult to see what relevance his evidence had otherwise. He was not giving any direct evidence about the matter in hand.
Surely, with all his political experience, Mr Hayden would have known his example was likely to be widely published. It is a rare day that a former Governor-General cites details of false sexual rumours about a former Prime Minister. That he now says he did not anticipate the obvious outcome of his evidence-giving reveals a singular naivety for a man presenting himself as having a relevant expert opinion on the nature of rumour-spreading.
The action asserts damage to the political careers of the plaintiffs who could not be in court for at least part of Wednesday as they were being sworn in to the new Howard Ministry.
The case, involving one Sydney and one Melbourne resident, is causing far wider publicity to the defamation than the orginal publication — a reference in a political book by Sydney author Bob Ellis, the bulk of which was quickly pulped.
In the meantime, Canberra people awaiting trials in personal-injury and criminal cases are left wondering at how the law permits this use of the court’s time.