The Federal Court of Australia has awarded $300,000 in damages to His Eminence Archbishop Makarios of Australia, after finding that a series of Greek-language articles published online were defamatory.
In a lengthy judgment handed down on Friday, February 27, Justice Wendy Abraham found that four articles published on the website Greek Flash News in 2021 caused serious harm to the Archbishop’s reputation and were based on unverified claims, speculation and misinterpretations of documents.
The publisher of the website, Alkis Morelas, represented himself at trial. Archbishop Makarios was represented by senior counsel Sue Chrysanthou SC, with Nicholas Olson, instructed by Lexington Law.
What the articles alleged
The Court found that the four articles, published between August and September 2021, conveyed imputations to the effect that Archbishop Makarios:
- had deceived the Greek community over bushfire fundraising and misused donated funds
- had misappropriated church money for personal use
- had accepted bribes to secure the appointment of bishops
- had mishandled or attempted to cover up allegations of sexual misconduct involving a priest
Justice Abraham found that these claims were conveyed as statements of fact, not opinion, and would have been understood by ordinary readers as serious accusations of criminal and unethical behaviour.
“The language is plain and unambiguous,” the judge said, finding that the articles were designed to shock readers and assert wrongdoing, rather than invite debate or commentary.
No factual basis for the claims
A central finding of the Court was that Mr Morelas failed to establish any factual basis for the allegations he published.
The judge found that he:
- relied heavily on hearsay and rumours
- misunderstood or distorted official documents and church processes
- failed to properly check facts
- did not seek or publish a response from Archbishop Makarios before publishing
In relation to fundraising for bushfire relief and overseas missions, the Court accepted evidence that funds were distributed appropriately and transparently, and that there was no evidence of dishonesty or misappropriation.
Claims that Archbishop Makarios lived extravagantly, spent millions on himself, or accepted bribes were also rejected as unsupported and, in some cases, plainly incorrect.
Sexual misconduct allegations
One article accused Archbishop Makarios of failing to act on allegations of sexual misconduct involving a priest and attempting to cover them up.
The Court found that these allegations were not proven, and that evidence showed the Archdiocese had taken action and cooperated with authorities when complaints were raised.
Justice Abraham said the publisher repeatedly mischaracterised church documents and continued to assert a cover-up even after the correct explanation had been provided to him.
Defences rejected
Mr Morelas argued that his articles were protected by:
- honest opinion
- qualified privilege
- justification (truth)
The Court rejected all three defences.
Justice Abraham found that the articles were not opinion pieces, but presented as factual exposés. Even if they were opinions, the Court held they were not based on “proper material” as required by law.
The defence of qualified privilege failed because the publisher did not act reasonably, including by failing to verify claims or seek comment.
A defence of justification failed because the truth of the allegations was not established.
Serious harm to reputation
The Court accepted that the articles caused serious harm to Archbishop Makarios’ reputation.
Evidence showed the articles were widely read within the Greek Orthodox and Greek-speaking community in Australia and overseas, and were shared via social media and email.
The Archbishop gave evidence that he was repeatedly confronted about the allegations by parishioners, clergy and senior church figures internationally. The Court accepted evidence that he experienced distress, anxiety and humiliation, and that his standing within the Church was damaged.
Justice Abraham noted that allegations of corruption and cover-ups are particularly damaging when made against a senior religious leader, who is expected by the community to uphold high moral and spiritual standards.
$300,000 damages, including aggravated damages
The Court awarded $300,000 in damages, including aggravated damages, to compensate for harm to reputation, personal distress and the need to publicly vindicate the Archbishop’s standing.
Aggravated damages were awarded due to the publisher’s conduct, including:
- the absence of any apology
- the continued publication of similar allegations after legal proceedings began
- the manner in which the defence was conducted
Injunction and costs
While Archbishop Makarios sought a broad ban on any future publications about him, the Court declined to grant such a sweeping order.
However, Justice Abraham found there was a real risk of further defamatory publications and indicated that a narrower injunction would be imposed to prevent repetition of the same or similar allegations.
Mr Morelas was also ordered to pay Archbishop Makarios’ legal costs.
