eSafety has commenced civil penalty proceedings in the Federal Court against the provider of the Telegram messaging service, for its alleged failure to detect and remove pro-terror material from the platform including videos of terrorist executions and mass shootings.
Under Australia's codes and standards, online services must take steps to prevent, detect, deter and disrupt the proliferation of unlawful material such as child sexual exploitation and abuse, pro-terror material and extreme crime and violence.
Following a year-long investigation eSafety alleges that Telegram has failed to comply with systemic safety obligations under the Online Safety Act's Relevant Electronic Services Standard by:
- failing to remove publicly posted pro-terror material and other unlawful material after becoming aware of it. Specifically, Telegram failed to remove material, such as videos of terrorist executions, after reports by Australian end-users were made, with material remaining available for up to three weeks;
- failing to minimise the risk of future breaches, such as by removing the relevant accounts, channels and groups after becoming aware of pro-terror material and other unlawful material;
- failing to detect known pro-terror material such as the live streamed Christchurch Mosque shooting from 2019, and the Buffalo mass shooting in New York from May 2022, with such material having been uploaded to Telegram nearly 3 months prior to its removal;
- failing to effectively disrupt and deter the distribution of pro-terror material.
- failing to have Terms of Service that prohibited users from accessing or distributing pro-terror material on all parts of Telegram; and
- failing to inform complainants of the outcome of their complaints about unlawful material.
Failure to comply with Australia's codes and standards could result in civil penalties of up to $54.6 million
eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant said the continued proliferation of pro-terror material and extreme violence on services such as Telegram risks normalising extremist content, causing real harm to Australians who are exposed to it, and facilitating recruitment and radicalisation of at-risk individuals.
"This case concerns content linked to some of the most notorious acts of known extremist violence in recent history, including material associated with the Christchurch and Buffalo terror attacks. We allege that this content remained accessible on the service long after Telegram had been put on notice," Ms Inman Grant said.
"With the painful aftermath of the Bondi terror attack still fresh in the minds of all Australians, and ASIO's assessment that Australia's terrorism threat level remains 'probable', it is more important than ever that digital platforms meet their obligations to protect the community.
"ASIO Director General Mike Burgess has recently stated that online radicalisation is playing an increasing role in ASIO investigations, and 'instead of being radicalised by associates in the real world, individuals are often being radicalised by strangers online' and specifically warned about the risks on Telegram.
"This should concern all of us. We're talking about the most seriously harmful online material and Australian law requires services across the online ecosystem to take responsibility for the role they play in allowing this material to be disseminated, including by enforcing their own terms of service.
"Telegram reports having more than a billion users worldwide and is a widely used service in Australia, visited by Australians on average 1.5 million times a month. It provides groups for up to 200,000 users, as well as channels for wider 'broadcasts' with no maximum limit and as such, Telegram has a responsibility to take reasonable steps to prevent the hosting, sharing, amplification and monetisation of this harmful material.
"No platform is above the law and this action demonstrates that eSafety will not hesitate to use the full range of its powers to protect Australians."
eSafety is seeking a range of orders including that Telegram pay to the Commonwealth such penalty as the Court determines to be appropriate in respect of the alleged failures declared to be in contravention of section 146(1) of the Online Safety Act 2021 (Cth).
Requirements under the Unlawful Material Codes and Standards go hand in hand with the Age-Restricted Material Codes that aim to prevent children's access to age-inappropriate material such as online pornography, violence and suicide and self-harm and disordered eating.
They also complement the social media age restrictions, ensuring that online services protect all Australians from the worst-of-the-worst content online, regardless of whether they are in scope, or out of scope, of the age-restrictions.
Statement of claim
eSafety Commissioner v Telegram FZ-LLC 20260729
To access eSafety's initiating court documents in relation to this matter, visit our page: Legal proceedings involving eSafety.
