There was pressure from “higher up” in the ABC to sack Antoinette Lattouf from the very first day she was on air, Lattouf’s line manager has told the federal court.
Elizabeth Green, the ABC manager who had approached Lattouf for the temporary hosting role, told the court she had “tried to stop them” from firing Lattouf but that “there was pressure coming from higher up”.
Even before Lattouf made the social media post that ABC managers say was the catalyst for her dismissal, Green said that “there was pressure from the Monday to get rid of Ms Lattouf”.
And the post itself – made on Tuesday – was not improper, Green told the court, saying she had told other ABC managers she “did not see anything wrong” with Lattouf’s actions.
A casual broadcaster, Lattouf was dismissed from hosting ABC Radio’s Sydney Mornings program in December 2023, after a coordinated campaign of complaints about her being on air, because of her views on the Israel-Gaza conflict.
Lattouf has brought an unlawful termination case before the federal court, which has seen a succession of ABC senior managers called to give evidence, and revealed the corporation’s internal debate about Lattouf’s “managed exit” and its institutional reputation “damage control”.
Ostensibly, Lattouf was dismissed for a single post on social media, allegedly in breach of a direction from her managers – which she disputes – but the court heard on Wednesday the pressure to take her off-air preceded her post.
Lattouf began hosting the Sydney Mornings radio program on Monday 18 December 2023.
On Tuesday 19 December she reposted a post on Instagram from Human Rights Watch which reported the Israeli military was using starvation as a weapon of war in Gaza. Independently, the ABC also reported on the HRW finding.
After the program aired on Wednesday 20 December, Lattouf was told she would not be hosting the final two mornings of her contract and told to leave the ABC. She had not discussed the war in Gaza during any of her three programs.
An affidavit from Chris Oliver-Taylor, the chief content manager of the ABC, said: “Ms Lattouf had not complied with an instruction or direction not to post anything during the week in which she was engaged with the ABC that would suggest that she was not impartial in relation to the Israel-Gaza war.”
‘Pressure from the Monday to get rid of Lattouf’
But Elizabeth Green, Lattouf’s line manager and then ABC Radio Sydney’s content director, said there was pressure from Lattouf’s first day on air for her to be removed.
Green told the court she saw Lattouf in a state of distress after she was sacked and told her she “had tried to stop them”. She said she was sorry Lattouf had been dismissed.
In a conversation the pair had in a board room, Green told Lattouf there was “pressure coming from higher up”.
“I said there was pressure for her to be removed from the Monday. I believed it was coming from higher up. I understood it had been referred up,” Green told the court.
“There was pressure from the Monday to get rid of Ms Lattouf.”
Oliver-Taylor’s affidavit stated that he believed Lattouf had been instructed not to post on social media for the duration of her contract to present on-air for the ABC.
But both Green and Lattouf said that in their discussion it was agreed Lattouf could post information that had a factual basis and came from credible, verified sources or from reputable organisations.
Under cross-examination, Green told the court she had cautioned Lattouf about “being mindful about posting on social media” and to uphold the ABC’s obligations to impartiality.
Green told the court she told Lattouf the ABC had “strict editorial guidelines” and it was “all about a perception of bias”.
“I was doing what I was instructed to do, which was to tell [Lattouf] to keep a low profile on social media.”
Within the ABC, there was initially resistance to removing Lattouf from her on-air position, with some managers cognisant it would appear as though the public broadcaster had acquiesced to a partisan, coordinated lobbying campaign.
Oliver-Taylor said in an internal email that “the blowback will be phenomenal” if Lattouf was fired. He recommended the ABC keep her on air until Friday, when her contract ended.
The court heard on Tuesday that the former ABC chair Ita Buttrose had forwarded dozens of emails complaining about Lattouf to senior ABC managers.
Karvelas posts compared amid claims of ‘utterly incoherent’ policy
Simon Melkman, a senior editorial adviser, told the court on Wednesday the ABC had policies which apply to private conduct and use of social media but there was not a general prohibition on staff expressing opinions on social media with which some members of the community might disagree.
“There is no blanket rule of that nature,” he said.
Melkman was taken to posts made on X by high-profile ABC journalist Patricia Karvelas on a number of issues, including Australia Day, the overturning of Roe v Wade in the US, and the Uluru statement. He was asked if those posts breached any standards or attracted any sanction.
Melkman said he could not assess the Karvelas posts in isolation, and that they needed to be read and understood “in context”.
Melkman was asked how he assessed Lattouf’s posts: “Broadly, I would characterise them as critical of the conduct of the state of Israel in regard to the conflict, broadly supportive of the Palestinian cause.”
Melkman told the court he did not object to management’s decision to remove Lattouf because he believed Lattouf may have breached personal use of social media guidelines.
“I would say that the Human Rights Watch allegation that starvation was being used as a tool of war was absolutely a matter of controversy,” he said.
“It was denied by Israel for instance. It was a matter of controversy absolutely.”
Lattouf’s legal team has foreshadowed it will argue Lattouf was treated differently to other ABC journalists who were not sanctioned for expressing personal and political views on social media.
Her barrister Oshie Fagir argued that the ABC’s claims her Human Rights Watch post breached impartiality guidelines had no foundation in any policy, procedure or legislation.
“What we propose to submit is that the rule as it has been articulated is utterly incoherent,” he told the court.
The case, before the justice Darryl Rangiah, will return to court for closing submissions later this month.
