The Australian government had cited it’s “Online Safety Act” in demanding that X censor the criticism of the transgender agenda by Canadian campaigner Chris “Billboard Chris” Elston.
But that censorship scheme now has been struck down by a tribunal.
It was an Administrative Review Tribunal that ruled in favor of Elston, who in February 2024 had gone online to criticize the appointment of Teddy Cook to a United Nations post.
Cook has been described by the Daily Mail as a transgender member of a new United Nations panel that’s drafting global health rules who has “a kinky track record in everything from bestiality to bondage, drugs and nudism.”
“Teddy Cook, a female-to-male trans Australian activist, started work this month on the World Health Organization’s 20-expert body, drafting care guidelines for trans and non-binary people,” the report said. It explained Cook calls herself a “professional queer…”
ADF International, which worked on Elston’s case, said the tribunal decision strikes the government order attempting to censor him.
Elston’s offense apparently was to not just criticize Cook, but refer to her with biologically accurate pronouns.
His post then was claimed by Australia’s eSafety commissioner to be “cyber abuse.”
Teddy Cook is a woman.
That’s a biological, objective fact.
But I’m with @BillboardChris in court today simply because he pointed this out on .
The Australian government have no right to censor the truth. pic.twitter.com/TsE6x5vPme
— Lois McLatchie Miller (@LoisMcLatch) March 31, 2025
BREAKING: The Australian government tried to censor a Canadian’s X post for using biologically accurate pronouns to describe WHO “expert” Teddy Cook.
We must defend our right to speak freely.
Join us at the Free Speech Summit & Independent Media Awards 2025.
Gold Coast |… pic.twitter.com/DlfM1gklPn— Australian National Review (@ANRHeadlines) July 2, 2025
“Both X and Elston challenged the order, arguing that the censorship was a violation of the fundamental right to free speech. Elston’s legal challenge was coordinated by ADF International, in conjunction with the Human Rights Law Alliance in Australia. The Administrative Review Tribunal in Melbourne held a week-long hearing on the case commencing March 31, 2025,” ADF International reported.
The commissioner made the wrong decision, the ruling found.
“This is a decisive win for free speech and sets an important precedent in the growing global debate over online censorship. In this case, the Australian government alarmingly censored the peaceful expression of a Canadian citizen on an American-owned platform, evidence of the expansive reach of censorial forces, even beyond national borders. Today, free speech has prevailed,” Paule Coleman, of the ADF International, said.
“This is a victory not just for Billboard Chris, but for every Australian—and indeed every citizen who values the fundamental right to free speech.”
Elston said, “I’m grateful that truth and common sense have prevailed. This decision sends a clear message that the government does not have authority to silence peaceful expression. My mission is to speak the truth about gender ideology, protecting children across the world from its dangers. With this ruling, the court has upheld my right to voice my convictions—a right that belongs to every one of us. My post should never have been censored in Australia, but my hope is that authorities will now think twice before resorting to censorship.”
The Christian Institute said the decision was by Damien O’Donovan, deputy president of the tribunal.
Elston had said, online, “This woman (yes, she’s female) is part of a panel of 20 ‘experts’ hired by the @WHO to draft their policy on caring for ‘transpeople.’ People who belong in psychiatric wards are writing the guidelines for people who belong in psychiatric wards.”
Cook, of Australia, complained.
O’Donovan noted Elston “classifies a person as either a man or a woman” by referencing their biological sex at birth.
“I am satisfied that he believes doing otherwise has implications for the rights and safety of women and children. I am satisfied that he knows that his practice in this regard is offensive to people who identify as transgender,” the ruling said.
But he said Australian Parliament was not trying to control debate on issues with its “cyber-abuse” law and that there was no evidence an ordinary person would think Elston “intended the post to have an effect of causing serious harm.”
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Bob Unruh
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://www.wnd.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.
