Bid to remove website article rejected

A judge has thrown out a woman’s application for an Otago Daily Times article about her drink-driving conviction to be removed from the newspaper’s website.

At a hearing in the Queenstown District Court yesterday, Judge Paul Keller considered the application by Bengi Baytekin for an order under the Harmful Digital Communications Act to have the April 29 article taken down.

The article reported the 32-year-old Turkish national’s conviction and sentencing after she admitted a charge of drink-driving in the resort town on December 18 last year.

About a month after the chef and blogger arrived in New Zealand on a working holiday visa, she was pulled over by police after driving over a painted roundabout at speed.

Her blood alcohol level of 121mg was more than double the legal limit.

An application for a discharge without conviction was refused and she was disqualified from driving for seven months.

At yesterday’s hearing, Judge Keller said he would give his decision in Baytekin’s absence, telling ODT counsel Michael Walker any oral submissions were unnecessary.

Despite representing herself, Baytekin had not arranged to participate in the hearing by audiovisual link from overseas, despite telling the court’s case manager she intended to do so.

In her written submissions, she claimed the newspaper’s publication of her name and particulars in the article had caused her "serious emotional distress".

It had also breached the Act’s first "communication principle" by disclosing "sensitive personal information" about her.

Judge Keller said the article did not disclose such information, but published facts from open court proceedings.

The application was contrary to the principle of freedom of expression in the Human Rights Act.

"She does not meet the threshold for bringing the claim by a long margin."

He noted Baytekin had lodged a complaint about the article with Netsafe — a non-profit organisation focused on online safety — and Netsafe had taken no action.

An order for the defendant’s costs was unnecessary, he said.

— Guy Williams, PIJF court reporter

 

 

Advertisement

OUTSTREAM