澳大利亚秘书长委员会向议会提交意见书，要求限制议员在社交媒体上发布高级公务员议会听证会作证的视频剪辑1。该委员会表示关切"从委员会议事录中摘录越来越多地用于社交媒体，特别是在没有背景的情况下呈现的材料"1，并要求议会"防止在社交媒体上使用这一证据"1。委员会担忧此类发布可能导致公务员遭到批评和嘲笑。
为缓解这一问题，秘书长委员会建议的替代方案包括确保视频"完整呈现"，"视频不应编辑，字幕不应添加"，以及"发布时应禁用评论"1。然而，该提议可能违反澳大利亚宪法中关于政治言论的隐含保障1。澳大利亚宪法规定议员必须被人民"选择"，这产生了关于政治沟通的隐含自由1。该提议直接限制了政治交流，其目的不是防止真实伤害而是防止批评。
澳大利亚高等法院在1992年的一桩类似案例中推翻了一项使"用言词"使高级政府官员"声誉受损"成为违法的法律1。此外，Robodebt皇家委员会报告曾指出公务员高层存在"对透明度和问责制持敌对态度"的文化1。
Australia's Secretary-Generals Committee has submitted a formal submission to Parliament requesting restrictions on members of parliament sharing video clips of senior civil servants testifying before parliamentary inquiries on social media, citing concerns that such posts may expose officials to criticism and ridicule.1 The committee expressed particular worry about "excerpts from committee proceedings increasingly being used on social media, especially material presented without context."1
The committee's proposed solution includes several measures: ensuring videos are presented in their entirety, prohibiting editing or the addition of captions, and disabling comments when posts are made.1 However, legal experts argue this proposal may conflict with Australia's constitutional protections for political speech. The Australian Constitution establishes that members of parliament must be chosen by the people, which has been interpreted by courts as creating an implicit freedom regarding political communication.1 In a significant 1992 High Court decision, the court struck down legislation that made it unlawful to use words that damaged the reputation of senior government officials, a precedent that challenges restrictions aimed at preventing criticism rather than preventing demonstrable harm.1
The committee's submission reflects broader concerns within the senior public service about transparency and accountability. A Royal Commission into the Robodebt scheme previously identified a culture among senior bureaucrats that was hostile toward transparency and accountability measures.1
评论
还没有评论，欢迎留下第一条。