In a shocking development that has rocked Victorian politics, MP Moira Deeming is suing Liberal leader John Pesutto for defamation. The lawsuit, currently being heard in the Federal Court in Melbourne, centers around allegations that Pesutto falsely portrayed Deeming as a Nazi sympathizer in the wake of a controversy involving neo-Nazis who gatecrashed a political rally she helped organize.
The Let Women Speak Rally Controversy
The defamation case stems from events surrounding the Let Women Speak rally held on March 18, 2023. Deeming spoke at the event, which was intended to focus on gender issues but was disrupted by the unexpected arrival of neo-Nazi protesters. Their presence at the rally sparked widespread outrage and put Deeming under intense public scrutiny.
In the aftermath, Pesutto moved swiftly to expel Deeming from the Liberal Party, citing the need to distance the party from extremist elements. However, Deeming now contends that Pesutto’s public statements about the incident went too far, crossing the line into defamation by falsely painting her as a Nazi sympathizer.
Deeming’s Claims of a “False Narrative”
Central to Deeming’s case is the argument that Pesutto deliberately crafted a “false narrative” to justify her expulsion from the party. Her lawyer, Sue Chrysanthou SC, asserted in court that the decision to oust Deeming was driven not by genuine concern over extremism, but rather by Pesutto’s frustration over having to field media questions whenever Deeming made controversial statements.
“Mrs Deeming was expelled because Mr Pesutto found it annoying to have to answer press questions about her whenever she made a statement about sex-based rights,” Chrysanthou told the court.
She further claimed that Pesutto blamed his own election loss in 2018 on the party’s focus on “non-mainstream issues,” like those championed by Deeming, and saw her expulsion as a way to avoid repeating that mistake.
Pesutto’s Defense: “Cauterizing the Damage”
Pesutto’s legal team has strongly pushed back against these allegations. His lawyer, Matthew Collins KC, framed Deeming’s conduct around the rally as an “extreme political problem” that required decisive action to “cauterize the damage” to the party. Collins drew parallels to previous Liberal scandals that had inflicted political harm, such as the infamous “lobster with a mobster” dinner involving former leader Matthew Guy.
“Mrs Deeming’s conduct on the 18th and 19th [of March] and her inaction thereafter caused serious political problems,” Collins argued. “That might be unfair and I might wish for a world in which debate is more nuanced, but that’s not the world we live in.”
Implications for Victorian Politics
As the trial unfolds, it has laid bare deep rifts within the Victorian Liberal Party. Deeming’s supporters see her as a champion of conservative values unfairly targeted for her views, while her critics argue her rhetoric and associations have damaged the party’s credibility. The outcome of the case could have major implications, not just for Deeming and Pesutto personally, but for the ideological direction and public image of the Liberals going forward.
Political analysts are watching closely to see how the court will weigh Deeming’s claims of defamation against Pesutto’s defense of political necessity. Some see the case as emblematic of broader struggles within center-right parties to define their stance on divisive social issues and fringe movements.
A Verdict with High Stakes
As closing arguments wrap up, all eyes now turn to Justice David O’Callaghan, who is expected to deliver a ruling in December. Whichever way the verdict falls, it is sure to send shockwaves through Victorian politics and could set important precedents for the limits of political speech and the liability of party leaders for the conduct of their members.
For Moira Deeming, the case represents a chance to clear her name and push back against what she sees as unfair vilification. For John Pesutto, it is a fight to vindicate his leadership and show that taking a hard line against extremism, even within his own ranks, is both justified and necessary.
As the state waits for a resolution, one thing is certain: the Deeming defamation trial has peeled back the curtain on the messy realities of partisan politics and exposed the challenge of balancing principles, pragmatism, and public perception in an unforgiving media landscape. Where the chips will ultimately fall remains to be seen, but the impacts are sure to be felt long after the gavel comes down.
