A pecuniary penalty is separate to compensation. The judge will deliver a decision on this issue at a later date, after receiving a further round of written submissions.
Rangiah made a declaration in June that the broadcaster breached the Fair Work Act by sacking Lattouf for reasons including her political opinion and by contravening its enterprise agreement in failing to give her an opportunity to respond to allegations against her.
On Wednesday, the ABC called chief people officer Deena Amorelli to give evidence in relation to the penalty issue.
Antoinette Lattouf and one of her barristers, Philip Boncardo, arrive at the Federal Court in Sydney on Wednesday.Credit: Sam Mooy
She was asked by Fagir about a statement issued by the ABC after her court win and whether any personal apology had been made to her.
“To the best of your knowledge, the managing director [Hugh Marks] who made the statement has never made any attempt to contact Ms Lattouf directly?” Fagir said.
“Not to my knowledge,” Amorelli said.
Amorelli agreed the ABC’s budget was about $1 billion a year. Fagir suggested that “the penalty which the ABC considers appropriate represents about 0.00375 per cent of that budget”.
The penalty which the ABC considers appropriate represents about 0.00375 per cent of … [its $1 billion] budget.
Antoinette Lattouf’s barrister, Oshie Fagir
Boncardo said in submissions to the court that “the decision by the ABC that Ms Lattouf should lose her employment because of her political opinion is conduct antithetical to a liberal democracy such as Australia”, and it should be sanctioned accordingly.
The “systematic campaign” by pro-Israel lobbyists produced the “highly unusual circumstance” that senior ABC executives were involved in the decision to sack Lattouf, Boncardo said.
He suggested Marks would have been a more appropriate person than Amorelli to give evidence in court, but the ABC said Marks was not working at the broadcaster at the time in question.
In written submissions, the ABC’s barristers, Ian Neil, SC, and Vanja Bulut, said the ABC had “apologised to Ms Lattouf, as well as its employees more widely, and to the court, for the contravening conduct”.
“With respect, Ms Lattouf’s criticism of the ABC’s position should be rejected,” they said.
Neil told the court the decision was made in a context of “the febrile state of controversy about the issue in question at that time in the Australian community”, and there was a degree of “pressure, stress, confusion [and] panic”.
He said Marks’ statement after the court’s decision was “the epitome” of a voluntary expression of contrition and regret.
Lattouf was removed as a fill-in host of ABC Radio Sydney’s Mornings program in December 2023 after sharing a post critical of Israel from non-governmental organisation Human Rights Watch on social media and adding the caption: “HRW reporting starvation as a tool of war.”
Rangiah said the post was “bound to be controversial” and triggered a “state of panic” within the ranks of the ABC’s senior management.
Lattouf’s actions were “ill-advised and inconsiderate of her employer”, the judge said, but she had not been directed to refrain from posting about the war on social media while employed by the ABC.
Rangiah found Lattouf was “merely provided with advice that it would be best not to post anything controversial about the war”.
The broadcaster had already received complaints about Lattouf’s appointment because of her views about the war, which were not expressed on radio.
“The complaints asserted she had expressed antisemitic views, lacked impartiality and was unsuitable to present any program for the ABC,” Rangiah said.
“It became clear that the complaints were an orchestrated campaign by pro-Israel lobbyists to have Ms Lattouf taken off air.”
Lattouf was sacked about 48 hours after the complaints started, three days into a planned five-day hosting stint.
with Calum Jaspan
