The politics of the public and private spheres: the High Court's decision in Monis and the gendered privileging of free speech

The High Court of Australia’s decision in Monis v The Queen and Droudis v The Queen concerned whether Monis and Droudis’s use of the postal service to send offensive letters warranted the constitutional protection of the implied freedom of political communication. The outcome was a split decision: the three men judges found for Monis and Droudis, and the three women judges against. We argue that this decision was significant because it draws attention to the law’s key role in framing political understandings of the nature of and demarcation between public and private spheres. The Court’s interpretations concerning how we should understand and apply the foundational relationships binding the state, the individual, and the public and private spheres in the twenty-first century highlights the gendered complexities of the politics shaping those relationships. It also highlights the gendered privileging of what sort of speech should be exempted from the law’s immediate purview, and in so doing, further reveals the masculinism upon which Australia’s constitutional framework rests.