Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

The Australian's campaign's distorting emphasis on Sharia

By Zachariah Matthews - posted Friday, 23 March 2012


At no point did the journalist attempt to set the record straight but instead appears to have chosen not to let this pertinent fact of the case get in the way of a good story.

The objections by "senior Muslim leaders" it reported prompted an expected rebuttal from seasoned campaigner Cory Bernardi in a letter to The Australian. The Senator seized the opportunity presented by the newspaper's campaign to warn that "the concerns of many Australians about the dangers of sharia-creep are entirely justified."

One can only presume that when the Attorney-General, Nicola Roxon, was co-opted in the third report, the federal member for Gellibrand was merely re-affirming the current position that in the absence of a valid will, Australian law applies. The assets of the deceased person must be distributed according to the succession laws of the states and territories of Australia and not according to any other set of instruments.

Advertisement

The Australian's coverage conveniently neglected to mention that the judgment also included oral evidence from the Imam of the Canberra Islamic Centre who "conceded that if a Muslim person died not having made a will, the division of their estate would be based on the law of the country where they had been living."

I am certain the AG was not proposing, as two of the articles implied, that the laws of succession should be amended to remove the right of a person to freely choose who gets his or her assets after death. You and I are free to determine based on any criteria how to distribute our assets as long as adequate provision is made for dependents. Fortunately the judge in this case, Master David Harper of the ACT Supreme Court left this inalienable right intact.

Journalists have a responsibility to be balanced and unbiased as required by the first article of the Australian Journalists Association's Code of Ethics: "Report and interpret honestly, striving for accuracy, fairness and disclosure of all essential facts. Do not suppress relevant available facts, or give distorting emphasis." Editorials and opinion pieces should be left for campaigning in support of a newspaper's ideology and not news reports.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

8 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Dr Zachariah Matthews is the Executive Director of Just Media Advocacy. You can follow him on Twitter @JMAdvocate.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Zachariah Matthews

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Zachariah Matthews
Article Tools
Comment 8 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy