Jewish leaders 'let down' in fight with Muslim preacher

The Advertiser

21 hours ago

Leaders for the nation's peak Jewish representative body claim they were left with no choice but to sue an Islamist preacher after he referred to Jews as "vile" and "treacherous".
Executive Council of Australian Jewry co-chief executive Peter Wertheim and deputy president Robert Goot launched legal action over a fiery series of sermons in November 2023.
The speeches, which amassed thousands of views online, were delivered by Islamist preacher Wissam Haddad, who referred to Jewish people as "vile", "treacherous" and "murderous".
By suing the preacher, Mr Wertheim said he and Mr Goot had been able to achieve something no government, law enforcement, or human rights agency had managed.
"We have finally brought to account someone who despises Australia's way of life," he said outside the Federal Court on Friday.
"This case is a test of whether rank anti-Semitism, whichever way it might be dressed up, falls into the category of views that members of the community are now expected to put up with."
Justice Angus Stewart has reserved his decision on whether the preacher's speeches constitute racial discrimination.
Mr Wertheim said they had been left with no alternative than to defend the honour of the Australian Jewish community after the law failed to protect them.
"It's a tragedy when our institutions fail us and citizens are left to fend for themselves, by having to pursue a private remedy for a public wrong," he said.
Mr Haddad argued his speeches were not racist because they were historical and religious lectures delivered to his Muslim congregation to contextualise the war in Gaza.
His lawyer Andrew Boe said he had been quoting Islamic texts so ruling in favour of the two Jewish plaintiffs would be the equivalent of prohibiting the recitation of religious material.
"He may be a very bad preacher," he said.
"That doesn't mean what he's saying about Islam doesn't fall within (the protections for freedom of religious expression)."
The preacher confined his comments outside court to an exhortation to "Free Palestine" and an assurance he would respect the court ruling when it is handed down.
Mr Wertheim and Mr Goot are seeking the removal of the published speeches, a public corrective notice and an order restraining Mr Haddad making similar comments in future.
Mr Goot said outside court the measures sought against Mr Haddad did not seek to interfere with his freedom of speech except in a "very confined" manner.
"What Mr Haddad said and did in the series of speeches he made was utterly unacceptable, un-Australian and - we hope the court will find - unlawful," he said.
His barrister told the court the preacher had a pattern of offensive conduct towards other religious groups and had not apologised for the speeches.
But the Sydney-based Al Madina Dawah Centre cleric said during the hearing he "never set out to insult Jews".
Mr Boe argued the allegedly racist lectures were selectively edited and would not have been seen by Jewish people if not reported in the media.
Mr Haddad's speeches were delivered during a time of heightened sensitivity after Palestinian terror group Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, 2023.
The reporting of the event prompted queries and concerns from Mr Haddad's congregants and at the same time left Jewish Australians feeling unsafe, the court was told.
Leaders for the nation's peak Jewish representative body claim they were left with no choice but to sue an Islamist preacher after he referred to Jews as "vile" and "treacherous".
Executive Council of Australian Jewry co-chief executive Peter Wertheim and deputy president Robert Goot launched legal action over a fiery series of sermons in November 2023.
The speeches, which amassed thousands of views online, were delivered by Islamist preacher Wissam Haddad, who referred to Jewish people as "vile", "treacherous" and "murderous".
By suing the preacher, Mr Wertheim said he and Mr Goot had been able to achieve something no government, law enforcement, or human rights agency had managed.
"We have finally brought to account someone who despises Australia's way of life," he said outside the Federal Court on Friday.
"This case is a test of whether rank anti-Semitism, whichever way it might be dressed up, falls into the category of views that members of the community are now expected to put up with."
Justice Angus Stewart has reserved his decision on whether the preacher's speeches constitute racial discrimination.
Mr Wertheim said they had been left with no alternative than to defend the honour of the Australian Jewish community after the law failed to protect them.
"It's a tragedy when our institutions fail us and citizens are left to fend for themselves, by having to pursue a private remedy for a public wrong," he said.
Mr Haddad argued his speeches were not racist because they were historical and religious lectures delivered to his Muslim congregation to contextualise the war in Gaza.
His lawyer Andrew Boe said he had been quoting Islamic texts so ruling in favour of the two Jewish plaintiffs would be the equivalent of prohibiting the recitation of religious material.
"He may be a very bad preacher," he said.
"That doesn't mean what he's saying about Islam doesn't fall within (the protections for freedom of religious expression)."
The preacher confined his comments outside court to an exhortation to "Free Palestine" and an assurance he would respect the court ruling when it is handed down.
Mr Wertheim and Mr Goot are seeking the removal of the published speeches, a public corrective notice and an order restraining Mr Haddad making similar comments in future.
Mr Goot said outside court the measures sought against Mr Haddad did not seek to interfere with his freedom of speech except in a "very confined" manner.
"What Mr Haddad said and did in the series of speeches he made was utterly unacceptable, un-Australian and - we hope the court will find - unlawful," he said.
His barrister told the court the preacher had a pattern of offensive conduct towards other religious groups and had not apologised for the speeches.
But the Sydney-based Al Madina Dawah Centre cleric said during the hearing he "never set out to insult Jews".
Mr Boe argued the allegedly racist lectures were selectively edited and would not have been seen by Jewish people if not reported in the media.
Mr Haddad's speeches were delivered during a time of heightened sensitivity after Palestinian terror group Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, 2023.
The reporting of the event prompted queries and concerns from Mr Haddad's congregants and at the same time left Jewish Australians feeling unsafe, the court was told.
Leaders for the nation's peak Jewish representative body claim they were left with no choice but to sue an Islamist preacher after he referred to Jews as "vile" and "treacherous".
Executive Council of Australian Jewry co-chief executive Peter Wertheim and deputy president Robert Goot launched legal action over a fiery series of sermons in November 2023.
The speeches, which amassed thousands of views online, were delivered by Islamist preacher Wissam Haddad, who referred to Jewish people as "vile", "treacherous" and "murderous".
By suing the preacher, Mr Wertheim said he and Mr Goot had been able to achieve something no government, law enforcement, or human rights agency had managed.
"We have finally brought to account someone who despises Australia's way of life," he said outside the Federal Court on Friday.
"This case is a test of whether rank anti-Semitism, whichever way it might be dressed up, falls into the category of views that members of the community are now expected to put up with."
Justice Angus Stewart has reserved his decision on whether the preacher's speeches constitute racial discrimination.
Mr Wertheim said they had been left with no alternative than to defend the honour of the Australian Jewish community after the law failed to protect them.
"It's a tragedy when our institutions fail us and citizens are left to fend for themselves, by having to pursue a private remedy for a public wrong," he said.
Mr Haddad argued his speeches were not racist because they were historical and religious lectures delivered to his Muslim congregation to contextualise the war in Gaza.
His lawyer Andrew Boe said he had been quoting Islamic texts so ruling in favour of the two Jewish plaintiffs would be the equivalent of prohibiting the recitation of religious material.
"He may be a very bad preacher," he said.
"That doesn't mean what he's saying about Islam doesn't fall within (the protections for freedom of religious expression)."
The preacher confined his comments outside court to an exhortation to "Free Palestine" and an assurance he would respect the court ruling when it is handed down.
Mr Wertheim and Mr Goot are seeking the removal of the published speeches, a public corrective notice and an order restraining Mr Haddad making similar comments in future.
Mr Goot said outside court the measures sought against Mr Haddad did not seek to interfere with his freedom of speech except in a "very confined" manner.
"What Mr Haddad said and did in the series of speeches he made was utterly unacceptable, un-Australian and - we hope the court will find - unlawful," he said.
His barrister told the court the preacher had a pattern of offensive conduct towards other religious groups and had not apologised for the speeches.
But the Sydney-based Al Madina Dawah Centre cleric said during the hearing he "never set out to insult Jews".
Mr Boe argued the allegedly racist lectures were selectively edited and would not have been seen by Jewish people if not reported in the media.
Mr Haddad's speeches were delivered during a time of heightened sensitivity after Palestinian terror group Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, 2023.
The reporting of the event prompted queries and concerns from Mr Haddad's congregants and at the same time left Jewish Australians feeling unsafe, the court was told.
Leaders for the nation's peak Jewish representative body claim they were left with no choice but to sue an Islamist preacher after he referred to Jews as "vile" and "treacherous".
Executive Council of Australian Jewry co-chief executive Peter Wertheim and deputy president Robert Goot launched legal action over a fiery series of sermons in November 2023.
The speeches, which amassed thousands of views online, were delivered by Islamist preacher Wissam Haddad, who referred to Jewish people as "vile", "treacherous" and "murderous".
By suing the preacher, Mr Wertheim said he and Mr Goot had been able to achieve something no government, law enforcement, or human rights agency had managed.
"We have finally brought to account someone who despises Australia's way of life," he said outside the Federal Court on Friday.
"This case is a test of whether rank anti-Semitism, whichever way it might be dressed up, falls into the category of views that members of the community are now expected to put up with."
Justice Angus Stewart has reserved his decision on whether the preacher's speeches constitute racial discrimination.
Mr Wertheim said they had been left with no alternative than to defend the honour of the Australian Jewish community after the law failed to protect them.
"It's a tragedy when our institutions fail us and citizens are left to fend for themselves, by having to pursue a private remedy for a public wrong," he said.
Mr Haddad argued his speeches were not racist because they were historical and religious lectures delivered to his Muslim congregation to contextualise the war in Gaza.
His lawyer Andrew Boe said he had been quoting Islamic texts so ruling in favour of the two Jewish plaintiffs would be the equivalent of prohibiting the recitation of religious material.
"He may be a very bad preacher," he said.
"That doesn't mean what he's saying about Islam doesn't fall within (the protections for freedom of religious expression)."
The preacher confined his comments outside court to an exhortation to "Free Palestine" and an assurance he would respect the court ruling when it is handed down.
Mr Wertheim and Mr Goot are seeking the removal of the published speeches, a public corrective notice and an order restraining Mr Haddad making similar comments in future.
Mr Goot said outside court the measures sought against Mr Haddad did not seek to interfere with his freedom of speech except in a "very confined" manner.
"What Mr Haddad said and did in the series of speeches he made was utterly unacceptable, un-Australian and - we hope the court will find - unlawful," he said.
His barrister told the court the preacher had a pattern of offensive conduct towards other religious groups and had not apologised for the speeches.
But the Sydney-based Al Madina Dawah Centre cleric said during the hearing he "never set out to insult Jews".
Mr Boe argued the allegedly racist lectures were selectively edited and would not have been seen by Jewish people if not reported in the media.
Mr Haddad's speeches were delivered during a time of heightened sensitivity after Palestinian terror group Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, 2023.
The reporting of the event prompted queries and concerns from Mr Haddad's congregants and at the same time left Jewish Australians feeling unsafe, the court was told.