A classical pianist who alleges the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra unlawfully discriminated against him because of his views on Israeli forces killing Palestinian journalists says he did not consider apologising for making the statement at the centre of the case.

Pianist Jayson Gillham is suing the MSO over a cancelled Melbourne concert he was contracted to perform on 15 August 2024, a cancellation which he claims was an attempt to silence him over his stance on the Gaza conflict.

At a performance four days earlier in Southbank’s Iwaki Auditorium, Gillham had played a short piece called Witness, composed by Australian multimedia artist Connor D’Netto, which he dedicated to Palestinian journalists who were killed by Israeli forces.

Introducing the work, the pianist addressed the audience, stating that more than 100 Palestinian journalists had been killed, and that the targeting of journalists in a conflict was a war crime under international law.

The trial started in the federal court in Melbourne on Monday.

Gillham, who was the first witness, said that making a political statement before introducing a piece was not unusual, and that he had also done so earlier in the concert when introducing Autumn in Warsaw by the composer Ligeti.

He denied that he deliberately misled his agent, Elaine Armstrong, about the introduction or the length of the piece, which he told her was four minutes when it was actually six.

Gillham also denied a suggestion from Justin Bourke KC, for the MSO, that he wanted to “give yourself cover” for the introduction by “pretending” it was D’Netto’s words he was saying, rather than his own.

Bourke asked Gillham about an Instagram message exchange he had with D’Netto about the piece the month before it was performed, in which Gillham said he was worried Armstrong or the MSO might not allow him to add Witness to the program and asked if he was being paranoid about it.

“I was worried that the MSO would not allow the addition of Witness on the basis of the dedication, that it was dedicated to the journalists of Gaza, but that they would find another way to not allow it, they would find another excuse, like perhaps the program had already been agreed … or that the program was already long enough,” Gillham said.

After the MSO cancelled his future performance, but then backtracked and decided he should perform, Gillham and a PR representative discussed a joint statement that would be issued.

But he said he never considered apologising as part of the statement, which was something the MSO were expected to do for its decision.

Justice Graeme Hill told the court before opening submissions in the trial that while he was aware the matter had attracted public controversy: “This is not a case about that public controversy, and I’m not going to let the case turn into a roving inquiry about that public controversy.

“Things about a situation in the Middle East are not, as I see it now, part of the legal issues in this case, even if they are part of the reason we are here.”

Gillham’s barrister, Sheryn Omeri KC, said in her opening submission that there was nothing in the MSO contract that prevented Gillham from making the statement.

The statement was his genuinely held political belief, and nothing about it would have had such an effect on the audience that the MSO was warranted in cancelling the future performance.

She said Gillham was applauded after performing Witness – despite claims from MSO that it was not well-received – and no audience member raised concerns with him about his introduction when he spoke with them and signed CDs after the performance.

“There is a difference between feeling uncomfortable and feeling unsafe,” Omeri said.

“Nothing in Mr Gillham’s introduction to Witness could or would have made anybody feel unsafe in the true sense of that term.”

Bourke said in his opening submission that Gillham was playing on the MSO’s stage, and was therefore not permitted to share his personal views on the “most hotly contested controversial issue around the world”.

“There should be some commonsense expectations when you engage a classical musician to appear on your stage,” he said.

“That you won’t abuse a captive audience with statements that would clearly upset or offend some members of your audience … that you will work corporately with your host about what will occur on stage [and] you won’t deceive your host.

“Fundamentally, there’s a time and a place for everything.”

Gillham completed his evidence on Monday afternoon, with the trial set down for 14 more days.