A blogger should be jailed for defying orders banning the naming of two women who were alleged to have had affairs with Seven West Media chief executive Tim Worner, a Sydney judge has been told.
Self-described journalist Shane Dowling was found guilty in March of contempt of court after he breached orders demanding he remove the names of the women from his website and stop republishing the allegations made in legal documents by Amber Harrison.
Ms Harrison, whose court battle over her affair with Mr Worner ended on Monday, had alleged the two Seven on-screen identities also had sexual relationships with him.
The women, who have been given the pseudonyms Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2, have denied the claims and their names are suppressed by the court.
At Dowling's sentence hearing in the NSW Supreme Court on Friday, the women's lawyer Kieran Smark SC said the only appropriate penalty for the contempt of court was a prison sentence.
Since he had been found guilty, Dowling had continued to "blatantly" breach the orders, displaying a "degree of relish" in so doing, the lawyer said.
"There certainly is a degree of very frank embracing of the fact that these contempts are continuing."
One of Dowling's motives could be inferred to be a "reflection of an antipathy he seems to bear towards various persons including Mr Kerry Stokes, a shareholder in Seven West Media".
Mr Smark said Dowling had previously been fined after being convicted of contempt in another case.
"Undeterred, conduct such as that in the present case has the potential both to undermine respect for the court's orders, and also to undermine the effectiveness of such orders, each of which is against the public interest."
Dowling did not appear in court on Friday but sent Justice Ian Harrison written submissions which the judge described as "somewhat discursive and garbled".
Dowling said the proceedings were "a national scandal", adding he'd done nothing more than "any journalist does every day around the country" in naming people referred to in tendered legal documents.
"This matter is a huge free speech, political communication and public interest matter," he wrote.
"If Australian courts are going to jail or penalise journalists for doing nothing more than reporting the news then Australia is no better than China or Russia."
The judge said a transcript of the hearing would be sent to Dowling so he could respond to Mr Smark's submissions by August 4.
