In a damning submission, an age-check firm warns big fines may be seen as a “small price to pay” if copping them allows Australia’s ban to be “wrongly” be portrayed as a failure.<\/p>\n
“[They] have failed to remove pro-terror material after becoming aware of it, including after reports from Australian end users were made.”\u00a0<\/p>\n
The alleged content includes Islamic State beheadings and executions, and “other horrific material” used for radicalisation.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Ms Inman Grant said the material remained online “long after” the platform had been notified of its existence by users, sometimes up to three months after the reports were made.\u00a0<\/p>\n
She said it was “more important than ever” that platforms met their obligations, with the backdrop of the Bondi terror attack last year and a “heightened security environment” in Australia.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The case marks one of Australia’s most significant legal challenges against a major technology platform over the handling of terrorist content, testing how far online services must go to prevent extremist material from spreading on their networks.<\/p>\n
More than 1 billion people use Telegram around the world, and the site is visited by an average of 1.5 million Australian users a month.<\/p>\n
![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/australia\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/5617b8b316470024884d3b58d87ca356.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n
Telegram is used by 1.5 million Australians each month. (Reuters: Illustration by Dado Ruvic)<\/p>\n
Court challenge comes after ‘difficult’ engagement<\/p>\n
The court proceedings followed a year-long investigation into the platform.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Ms Inman Grant said the watchdog first sought to engage with the company in March 2024, but after that endured “five very difficult months of non-responsiveness” before the platform finally engaged.<\/p>\n
If the Federal Court finds Telegram failed to meet its legal obligations under the Online Safety Act, the company could face penalties of up to $54.6 million.<\/p>\n
Communications Minister Anika Wells said the government had “no tolerance for big tech to fail” in preventing and removing pro-terror content. \u00a0<\/p>\n
“Telegram needs to explain to Australian users, and the Federal Court, why it has allegedly not complied with Australian laws,” she said.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Under existing laws, Telegram does not need a licence to operate in Australia, but the eSafety commissioner could apply to the Federal Court to ask for the service be banned.\u00a0<\/p>\n
“We’ve never used those powers, and we will see how this all plays out and whether that actioned in warranted,” Ms Inman Grant said.\u00a0<\/p>\n