A former Bendigo councillor who sent a graphic tweet to a member of her community has been found guilty of misconduct by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Elise Chapman, who represented Lockwood ward between 2012 and 2016, appealed to VCAT against an independent council panel’s order she apologise for tweeting an image of children with bloodied and mutilated genitals.
“Oh we could have this here too? Would you like your f---y sliced off?” the February 2015 tweet read.
The tweet was in response to a post from a Bendigo woman who backed the development of a mosque in the city.
VCAT judge Marilyn Harbison, who described Ms Chapman as a “prominent and divisive” figure in Bendigo, rejected the appeal yesterday, deeming the tweet was in breach of the council’s code of conduct.
The code requires councillors treat all people with respect, regardless of their beliefs, race, culture and opinions.
“I can think of no more gross example of violation of these principles than to suggest those who would frequent a place of worship in Bendigo, or Bendigo residents who hold a particular religious belief, would mutilate young babies in the way she has represented in her tweet,” Judge Harbison wrote.
“In doing so, she has, whether wittingly or unwittingly, given voice to ugly and unjustified stereotyping of Muslims in the Bendigo community.”
Judge Harbison also found the number of people who saw the tweet was “sizeable”, with more than 6600 Twitter users following Ms Chapman at the time it was posted.
VCAT also rejected claims from the former councillor the tweet was not the work of her professional self, but rather her personal point-of-view.
The fact Ms Chapman responded to emails of support about the tweet by using her City of Greater Bendigo account was evidence she was acting in her capacity as a councillor at the time of writing the tweet, Judge Harbison found.
Parts of her Twitter account to which the tribunal had access also showed exchanges between Ms Chapman and members of the public about council-related matters.
“I find as a fact that her Twitter account and in particular the tweet which is the subject matter of these proceedings was sent by her as part of the performance of her role as a councillor for the City of Greater Bendigo,” Judge Harbison wrote.
Judge Harbison also noted the misconduct could have been avoided had Ms Chapman followed the example of fellow councillor James Williams and not responded to the woman’s tweet.
“All would have been well if [Ms Chapman] had followed the approach of another councillor, Cr Williams, who gave evidence in the hearing and said that if he had been sent an offensive tweet he would have ignored it,” she wrote.
Cr Williams was contacted for comment, as was former councillor Peter Cox, who was mayor at the time the tweet was posted.
Mayor Margaret O’Rourke, who was not a councillor at the time of Ms Chapman’s misconduct, supported the VCAT finding.
“Council supports the VCAT findings against former councillor Elise Chapman and hopes the ruling concludes this matter,” Cr O’Rourke said in a statement on Thursday.
“This is another step forward toward putting this matter behind us, so Council can continue its work making Greater Bendigo a vibrant, inclusive and welcoming community.”
Asked for her response to the VCAT finding, Ms Chapman said: “My personal political opinions on FGM (female genital mutilation) and Muslims remains [sic] the same.
“I am unapologetic about my vehement opposition to any group in our society who practices such barbaric mutilation of girls and women.
I can think of no more gross example of violation of these principles than to suggest those who would frequent a place of worship in Bendigo, or Bendigo residents who hold a particular religious belief, would mutilate young babies in the way she has represented in her tweet.
- Judge Harbison's finding in Elise Chapman case
“I consider myself reprimanded however that will never change my political opinions on the matter.”
The judge’s reprimand is the only penalty Ms Chapman will face as a result of the guilty verdict.
A spokeswoman from the tribunal said the finding was “a very serious form of censure for any professional”.
“By the publishing of the order, by it being there for everyone to see, it is a reprimand,” the spokeswoman said.
Because Ms Chapman was no longer a councillor, the only penalties available to Judge Harbison were a reprimand or an order to apologise.
But the judge found there was “no sense in requiring an apology” from the one-time elected official.
There is still a possibility the two-year-long saga could continue.
Julian Fidge, who represented Ms Chapman throughout her legal challenge, flagged last month the possibility of taking proceedings as far as the High Court if Ms Chapman’s appeal was not upheld.
“We hope that we will prevail and if we don’t, then of course, I would love to see what the High Court says about it because I think the High Court is the ultimate authority and they are really good at protecting free speech,” he said.