Legal & publication policy
This policy reduces legal and ethical risk. It is not a declaration that material cannot be defamatory, a waiver of anyone’s rights or a substitute for advice from a qualified media lawyer.
Our position
Defamation risk depends on the meaning conveyed, who is identifiable, the evidence available, the harm caused or likely, the jurisdiction and whether a legal defence can actually be proved. Calling a statement an “allegation,” publishing it anonymously or adding a disclaimer does not automatically make publication lawful.
Inside MECCA therefore treats each submission as a confidential research lead. No submission, evidence label or contributor consent is automatic authority to publish.
Pre-publication controls
Before publication, we identify every person or organisation who may be identifiable and write down the factual meanings a reasonable audience could take from the material, including meanings created by headlines, editing, images or omission.
Each material factual proposition is matched to records, first-hand witnesses or other reliable support. Anonymous testimony is assessed for proximity, consistency, motive, independence and available corroboration. Repetition does not by itself establish truth.
Verified facts are stated as facts only where the evidence supports that treatment. Allegations are attributed and clearly described as allegations. Opinion is labelled, genuinely held and based on identified proper material.
We record why publication serves a legitimate public interest, why the level of detail is necessary and whether the same purpose can be achieved with less reputational or privacy harm.
A person or organisation facing substantive criticism receives sufficient particulars to understand and answer the proposed claims, a reasonable opportunity to respond and fair inclusion of the substance of that response.
High-risk material is reviewed for accuracy, context, source safety, privacy, fairness and legal risk before release. Serious allegations are not published solely because a contributor submitted them.
We preserve the evidence and decision record supporting publication. Material factual errors are corrected promptly and significant changes carry a visible correction note.
Legal framework
Australian uniform defamation legislation generally requires a claimant to establish serious harm. Potential defences may include substantial truth, contextual truth, public interest, qualified privilege, honest opinion and fair reporting of proceedings of public concern. Each defence has legal requirements and must be supported by the actual evidence and reporting conduct.
For public-interest reporting, relevant considerations can include the seriousness of the meanings, distinguishing allegation from proven fact, source integrity, verification steps and whether the subject’s response was sought and fairly represented.
New Zealand’s Defamation Act 1992 includes defences such as truth, honest opinion and forms of privilege. Honest opinion must be genuine and have the required factual basis. The applicable law may depend on where people are identified, where material is accessed and where reputational harm occurs.
Because this investigation covers both countries, material with cross-border risk should receive jurisdiction-specific legal review before publication.
Concerns, replies and corrections
A person or organisation who believes proposed or published material is inaccurate, unfair or damaging may identify the material, explain the concern, provide supporting information and request a response, correction, clarification or removal.
Requests are assessed promptly. We may preserve material and records where reasonably necessary for legal, editorial or safety purposes.
Submit a legal concern or replyNothing on this page is legal advice to contributors, volunteers or readers. Before naming an individual, publishing a serious allegation, contacting a subject for comment or releasing the documentary, the project should obtain confidential advice from an Australian media lawyer and, where New Zealand publication risk arises, a New Zealand media lawyer.