OPINION: Anti co-governance campaigner Julian Batchelor lost his defamation case against TVNZ. Te Aniwa Hurihanganui, the reporter at the centre of the case, explains why that matters.
Sometimes you don’t realise the weight you’ve been carrying until it’s lifted.
On Tuesday afternoon, I got a call from a TVNZ lawyer to say we had won the defamation lawsuit brought by Julian Batchelor. The other defendant, researcher Dr Sanjana Hattotuwa, was also successful.
After an agonising three months, the wait was over.
Finally, a decision.
I called mum first. She had flown to Auckland in December to support me at the hearing, despite my assurances I’d be OK. Day after day, she sat in the public gallery, listening to hours of evidence.
She’s messaged nearly every week since asking about an outcome.
“I feel like crying,” she said over the phone, her voice breaking. So did I.
She’d been carrying a weight too.
Batchelor had sued TVNZ over a 1News story published in August 2023.
Although I wasn’t named in the lawsuit, it was my reporting he said had caused the harm. Work he claimed led to strangers in a cafe calling him a racist and a group of young people vandalising his home.
At the time, Batchelor had become quite the polarising figure. His nationwide anti co-governance campaign, and extreme views about Māori, had quickly drawn the attention of protestors and the media.
He is on record saying Māori are generally “arrogant and unteachable". He has said “claiming has become an integral part of the Māori way of life”.
He once described former Labour Minister Nanaia Mahuta’s moko kauae as a “barcode”.
And even after telling the court, without hesitation, that Māori lacked character, he still rejected the central allegation in my reporting that his rhetoric was racist.
Before this week’s decision, I kept wondering what it would mean if a judge agreed with him. What that might do to journalism in this country. How it could shape the way we report on race in the future.
Because if that isn’t racist rhetoric, what is?
Throughout the hearing, friends and colleagues tried to reassure me.
They said there was no chance TVNZ could lose and I would eventually emerge as some kind of hero, someone who had the courage to stand up to an intolerant man and defend journalism.
But I barely slept that week. Being forced to publicly defend my integrity was terrifying. And the thought of Batchelor walking away with any sense of vindication, after everything he had said, was even more chilling.
That concern was shared by my colleague Thomas Mead who reminded me before the hearing why it mattered that TVNZ defended the story.
“Imagine a world where you couldn’t report on racism,” he said.
In the end, District Court Judge David Clark dismissed Batchelor’s claim, calling it “wholly unsuccessful”.
All three defences of truth, honest opinion and responsible communication had been proven.
Crucially, Judge Clark was also clear on the question about whether Batchelor’s rhetoric was in fact racist.
“On any measure, the answer must be yes,” he said.
On any measure. He didn’t stop there. The judge acknowledged that Batchelor’s comments were not just one-off quips or isolated. They were “sustained” and “deliberately targeting Māori”.
“An example is Mr Batchelor’s generalised comment Māori lack character. It is difficult to understand what measure he uses to reach this conclusion but to label over 900,000 New Zealanders who identify as Māori and who lack character, is difficult to comprehend.”
'Difficult to comprehend'
As it turned out, there were many occurrences during the hearing that were difficult to comprehend - not least Batchelor’s only expert witness Peter Williams calling him a “nutter” behind his back.
The biggest revelation came when Batchelor confessed who (he said) had funded his entire case - billionaire Jim Grenon, one of NZME’s biggest shareholders, the company that owns the New Zealand Herald and Newstalk ZB.
Batchelor claimed he didn’t just bankroll the case - he also said he initiated it. He told the court Grenon contacted him about the story before he’d even seen it to suggest TVNZ be sued.
Grenon has yet to have the opportunity to explain the extent of his involvement in the case. He may get that chance next week at a case management conference on costs. But the revelation is profound nonetheless.
In his decision, Judge Clark questioned who the plaintiff really was.
In the months since the hearing, I have grappled with that question myself, and what really motivated this case.
It’s not lost on me that many other reporters in 2023 had also contacted Batchelor about his views. They too had published comments accusing him of racism but were never sued.
And as I’ve reflected, a quiet voice in my head has wondered whether the case would have existed at all if I wasn’t Māori.
If it’s true that Grenon funded this case, then I may never understand how someone behind closed doors could feel compelled to fund a case with no backbone all the way to trial.
But I do know that whatever the reasons behind it, the experience has only deepened my understanding of why journalism matters - and why I’ll continue to defend it.
SHARE ME