Hindmarsh Island Bridge Controversy - Aftermath

Aftermath

Successful defamation actions taken by developers Tom and Wendy Chapman and their son Andrew against conservation groups, academics, politicians, media operators, printers and individuals who had spoken out against the Bridge have resulted in the Chapmans receiving court judgements of around $850,000 in their favour. The bulk of the damages related to claims by the defendants that the Chapmans had used SLAPP accusations to silence them.

The defamation case defendants relied heavily on the defence of "fair comment upon a matter of public interest" and the "Lange Defence" (pronounced /ˈlɒŋi/ LONG-ee: The constitutional right to freedom of speech on political matters). However; the court found that these defences did not apply because the defendants were motivated by malice which was proven by the Defendants being engaged in a "campaign" to stop the bridge and the "targeting" of the Chapmans. The judgment was of concern to environmental activists as any form of direct action such as non-violent picketing, boycotting or attempts to coerce changes of policy or behaviour, while not illegal, could impute "malice" in any resulting defamation claim. As a result of the Chapman defamation actions, the Environmental Defenders Office has called for the introduction of a "Protection of Public Participation Act" for South Australia. Based on North American legislation, the proposed Act would ensure that those engaged in non-violent public participation are protected from threats or suits that infringe free speech.

In early 2002, Peter Sutton, a former head of Anthropology of the South Australian Museum who had been unable to take a position on the claims, stated that additional evidence discovered since the von Doussa judgement had changed his view. "I still allow that aspects of these beliefs may have been embellished or given greater weight than before......but the patterns and matches with earlier materials on some strands makes the overal fabrication theory insupportable."

In September 2002, the Alexandrina Council apologised to the Ngarrindjeri, acknowledged their rights as the traditional owners of the country and entered into a Kungun Ngarrindjeri Yunnan (Listen to Ngarrindjeri Speaking) agreement.

On 7 July 2010, the Government of South Australia endorsed the finding that "Secret Women's Business" was genuine in a ceremony at the foot of the bridge. Ngarrindjeri elders then led a symbolic walk across the bridge. Elders now believe it is acceptable for Ngarrindjeri people to use the bridge to access their land and waters but culturally and morally still reject the bridge.