Liberal party faces legal challenge over Chinese language election signs

  • 📰 SBSNews
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 25 sec. here
  • 2 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 13%
  • Publisher: 89%

Law Law Headlines News

Law Law Latest News,Law Law Headlines

An independent candidate who challenged Treasurer Josh Frydenberg at the recent federal election is taking the Liberal party to court over Chinese-language signs.

The signs were also used at polling booths in the nearby electorate of Chisholm which has a sizeable number of voters with Chinese heritage and was narrowly won by Liberal Gladys Liu.

Mr Yates was not surprised that it would likely take an independent to challenge political advertising standards as the major parties had taken advantage of weak electoral laws. There is no minimum standard of truth in advertising meaning information about policy and opposing candidates does not need to be factual. The AEC ruled that the signs did not breach electoral laws because they contained the necessary authorisation and they could not stop others from using the colour purple.

 

Thank you for your comment. Your comment will be published after being reviewed.
Please try again later.

If this wasn't kosher then why do we have signs in public areas (hospital etc) and Govt Forms (Centerlink etc) written in or with instructions of several different languages? Maybe he was merely accommodating his non english speaking Chinese community.

It would not matter what colour the signs were this idiot could not have one

what the hell is happening in this country. Chinese election material ? Ridiculous

We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:

 /  🏆 3. in LAW

Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

ANZ Bank faces fresh legal fight as ASIC takes it to court over feesThe watchdog is taking legal action over a fee that was charged 1.3 million times when customers failed to make scheduled payments between two of their accounts. clancyyeates About time. It’s called accountability
Source: smh - 🏆 6. / 80 Read more »