Judge preparing to determine whether Pauline Hanson made a racial slur in telling a Greens senator to go back to Pakistan

Pauline Hanson will soon learn whether telling a Muslim senator to pack their bags and go back to Pakistan is racist according to law.

Greens senator Mehreen Faruqi launched legal action against the One Nation leader over alleged racial discrimination through a September 2022 post on Twitter, now X, telling her to ‘piss off back to Pakistan’.

The alleged hate speech responded to a post by Senator Faruqi on the day Queen Elizabeth died.

The Greens deputy leader wrote she could not mourn the passing of the leader of a ‘racist empire built on stolen lives, land and wealth of colonised peoples’.

The case went through a four-day trial in the Federal Court before Justice Angus Stewart.

Senator Hanson claimed she did not know Senator Faruqi was Muslim when sending the tweet.

But Senator Faruqi produced reams of material showing she publicly identified as Muslim on various occasions, including in communications with the One Nation head.

This includes a pinned tweet in which Senator Faruqi said ‘I’m Muslim’ and a podcast on which Senator Hanson appeared as a guest, where the host identified her as Muslim.

Pauline Hanson claimed she didn’t know Mehreen Faruqi was Muslim when sending the tweet. (Mick Tsikas/AAP PHOTOS)

Senator Faruqi also tagged Senator Hanson in a 2018 tweet asking, ‘I’m curious. @PaulineHansonOz am I a good Muslim or a bad one?’

Senator Hanson denied she engaged in racial discrimination by sending the tweet.

Instead, she claimed to have engaged in political discourse by pointing out hypocrisy by the Greens deputy in criticising the monarchy while benefiting from immigrating to and living in Australia.

Justice Stewart is due to hand down his findings on Friday.

The court will determine whether Senator Hanson engaged in racial discrimination, identify any damages that may flow as a result, and settle a position on her argument that parts of the Racial Discrimination Act are not constitutional.