In what has been called a "victory for freedom of speech and the protection of children in Australia", the former managing director of the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL), Lyle Shelton, has been cleared of vilification by the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

The case had been brought before the tribunal after two drag performers lodged complaints over a number of blog posts and video appearances by Mr Shelton criticising the January 2020 hosting of drag story time events at a local public library in Brisbane, Australia.

Mr Shelton was represented by the Human Rights Law Alliance after he faced claims that he had incited "hatred towards, serious contempt for, or severe ridicule of" the performers on the basis of sexuality and gender identity.

The tribunal found that his posts and appearances had not been "derogatory or insulting", but contained facts about the drag shows and expressed Mr Shelton's views that children needed to be protected from sexualised role models.

"This is not just a victory for Lyle. This is a really good precedent-setting decision for all Christians who want to stand up and speak out against the sexualisation of children," John Steenhof, principal lawyer at the Human Rights Law Alliance, told Vision Radio.

"And that's really important for people to be confident that if they speak respectfully, if they speak about something that's definitely a matter of public interest, that there are protections at law for them."

ACL has welcomed the outcome of the case while warning that Australia faces a watershed moment for religious liberty with the federal government preparing to pass laws regarding online misinformation that has the potential to stifle free speech, and ongoing tensions among religious groups over proposed amendments to religious discrimination legislation.

"This is an important win for free speech, given the importance of being able to discuss publicly some of the massive issues which gender ideology poses for children, for Australian society, and Christians in particular," ACL said.

"The freedom to discuss such things openly should be more robustly protected than it is, without legal claims being made in response this easily."