Listen to the article

0:00
0:00

Liberal Senator Faces Court in Defamation Case Over Aboriginal Land Council Claims

A Liberal senator has been characterized as an “evasive witness” who made “baseless allegations” during a federal court defamation trial in Darwin, according to statements made Tuesday by the plaintiff’s legal representation.

Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price is being sued by Central Land Council (CLC) chief executive Lesley Turner over a media release issued in July 2024. The release allegedly contained defamatory claims about Turner, including assertions about a failed no-confidence motion against him and accusations of unprofessional conduct for allegedly failing to assist Aboriginal people living in impoverished conditions.

Sue Chrysanthou SC, representing Turner, delivered a blistering closing submission, claiming Senator Nampijinpa Price “sought to tarnish my client’s reputation” through repeated defamatory statements that were circulated through multiple channels.

“She was told that her publication was wrong nearly immediately by the Central Land Council on the morning of 11 July, but she just didn’t care,” Chrysanthou told the court. “She promoted and promulgated her defamation on Facebook to print journalists, with quotes through her staff, in broadcast interviews… and her defamation was repeated and circulated.”

The case centers on communications that followed a council meeting where CLC chair Matthew Palmer reportedly discussed removing Turner from his position. Palmer had issued his own media release containing similar claims, which Nampijinpa Price subsequently referenced in her release. The allegations were then reported by media outlets including the News Corp-owned NT News and the ABC.

Chrysanthou characterized the senator’s testimony as problematic, stating, “As a witness, the senator was often evasive and volunteered answers that made baseless allegations, not just against my client, but also the Central Land Council. Her answers were often illogical and self-serving.”

The defamatory imputations constituted “an attack on Turner’s integrity,” Chrysanthou argued, noting that the vague nature of the allegations left readers to speculate about “what terrible thing my client did to warrant this finding… that he should be gone.”

The defense, led by Peter Gray SC, countered that the reach of the senator’s media release was likely limited and questioned Turner’s testimony regarding the impact of the allegations. Gray suggested there was “an air of unreality” about Turner’s evidence, claiming he gave “highly emotive” testimony about the senator’s media release while minimizing the impact of similar publications from other sources.

Gray also argued that Nampijinpa Price had relied on her staff’s expertise in preparing the release, deliberately avoided naming Turner directly, and made efforts to check and amend the text over several days.

“There was significant and genuine public interest in the matter, so it was legitimate for her to publish quickly as long as she took reasonable care to get it right,” Gray said in defense of the senator’s actions.

The case highlights tensions surrounding Indigenous governance and representation in Australia’s Northern Territory. The Central Land Council is one of the most significant Aboriginal organizations in the region, holding statutory authority under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act to represent traditional landowners and advocate for Indigenous communities.

Senator Nampijinpa Price, who has Warlpiri heritage, has been a controversial figure in Australian politics, often taking positions that challenge established Indigenous advocacy organizations. This case occurs against the backdrop of ongoing national debates about Indigenous affairs policy and representation.

Justice Michael Wheelahan has reserved his decision in the case, with no indication given as to when a ruling might be expected.

The outcome could have significant implications for political communication regarding Indigenous organizations and the responsibilities of elected officials when making public statements about community leaders.

Verify This Yourself

Use these professional tools to fact-check and investigate claims independently

Reverse Image Search

Check if this image has been used elsewhere or in different contexts

Ask Our AI About This Claim

Get instant answers with web-powered AI analysis

👋 Hi! I can help you understand this fact-check better. Ask me anything about this claim, related context, or how to verify similar content.

Related Fact-Checks

See what other fact-checkers have said about similar claims

Loading fact-checks...

Want More Verification Tools?

Access our full suite of professional disinformation monitoring and investigation tools

6 Comments

  1. Linda Hernandez on

    These types of disputes involving indigenous land rights and governance can be highly contentious. I hope this case is resolved in a way that upholds justice and the legitimate interests of all parties, without descending into mudslinging.

    • Oliver Thompson on

      Agreed. Land rights and self-governance for indigenous communities are critical issues. This trial should aim to clarify the facts, not just score political points.

  2. Isabella Johnson on

    This seems like a complex and messy legal dispute involving serious accusations. I’m curious to learn more about the background and context – what exactly led to these claims and countercharges between the senator and land council CEO?

    • The article mentions the senator’s legal team characterized her as an ‘evasive witness’ who made ‘baseless allegations’. That’s a pretty damning portrayal. I wonder what the full story is behind these claims.

  3. Defamation cases can be tricky, with both sides often making strong accusations. It’ll be interesting to see what evidence and arguments are presented as this trial proceeds. Hopefully the facts can be established objectively, regardless of political affiliation.

    • You’re right, this seems like a politically charged case. It’s important the court focuses on the specific claims and evidence, not broader partisan narratives. A fair and impartial ruling is crucial.

Leave A Reply

A professional organisation dedicated to combating disinformation through cutting-edge research, advanced monitoring tools, and coordinated response strategies.

Company

Disinformation Commission LLC
30 N Gould ST STE R
Sheridan, WY 82801
USA

© 2025 Disinformation Commission LLC. All rights reserved. Designed By Sawah Solutions.