An activist depicted a female councillor as Miss Piggy. A judge says it’s political speech

A self-styled council watchdog has won an appeal against an intervention order granted to an inner-eastern Melbourne mayor after a judge ruled his social media posts, including one depicting her as Miss Piggy, were protected political speech.

Council Watch president Dean Hurlston hailed the County Court judgment released late on Friday as a win for democratic scrutiny of elected officials, as it overturned the court order Stonnington Mayor Melina Sehr was granted last year.

Magistrate Michelle Hodgson previously found “the gendered and personal undertones” of Hurlston’s posts and text messages to Sehr in recent years “crossed the line from fair commentary into targeted ridicule” that was intended to cause mental harm.

But County Court judge Julie Clayton disagreed and on Friday threw out the personal safety intervention order against Hurlston.

Clayton found the magistrate’s interpretation of political commentary protected under Victorian law was too narrow and Hurlston’s posts were primarily motivated by concern about the City of Stonnington’s governance.

“The personal integrity of politicians, quite apart from their policy positions, is a legitimate subject for news and current affairs,” Clayton wrote.

Speaking to this masthead on Saturday, Hurlston criticised Stonnington chief executive Dale Dickson for claiming the magistrate’s initial ruling was a “landmark court decision” before it was overturned.

“The council’s triumphal public statement now stands as a monument to poor judgment,” Hurlston said.

“This case should concern every journalist, activist, ratepayer and community watchdog. If robust criticism of public officials can be repackaged as a personal safety matter, democratic scrutiny itself is placed at risk.”

Sehr compiled an almost 500-page dossier of posts from Hurlston’s Stonnington Council Watch Facebook page and other messages that she said had escalated to personal harassment.

Clayton said Hurlston was “an enormous nuisance” to Sehr and some of the posts were hurtful, including one that accused the mayor of using her mother’s death to avoid questions.

She accepted the mayor felt unfairly targeted and fearful about further posts, but added: “That sort of fear, however, is not the same as a fear for one’s safety.”

The judge ultimately found Hurlston’s posts were published without malicious intent and thus an intervention order could not be made. The previous order restricted Hurlston’s online commentary towards Sehr and barred him from coming within two metres of her.

“Mr Hurlston may not abide by a journalistic code of conduct in relation to fair and balanced commentary,” Clayton said. “This does not mean he is not entitled to the protection afforded by [the act].”