NSW has passed controversial hate speech and protest laws. Here's what you need to know
The New South Wales government has passed controversial laws to crack down on hate speech and protests with the threat of hefty fines and jail time.
The laws – which passed on Thursday night – are part of a suite of reforms aimed at curbing antisemitism amid a spate of arson attacks and vandalism.
Some have praised the swift action taken by the Minns government, while others have criticised the broad nature of the laws. The criticism has also come internally from Labor MPs, with one reportedly saying in a meeting the protest-related laws were the most 'draconian' in decades.
Here's what you need to know.
The laws cover a number of measures, including displaying a Nazi symbol on or near a synagogue, and create an aggravated offence for graffiti on a place of worship.
But the most controversial changes have been the government's move to criminalise people making racist remarks in public and restrict protests near places of worship. Both carry a maximum penalty of two years in prison.
The government has made it an offence to hinder someone from leaving or entering a place of worship.
Controversially, police will also now have full application of their move on powers 'in or near' places of worship, regardless of what a protest is about and whether it is even directed at a religious institution.
This means that if someone is obstructing someone 'in or near' a place of worship, police can issue a move on order. Generally, this police power is restricted to only when there is risk of serious harm, given protests tend to obstruct people.
This will not apply to protests that have obtained approval from the police via a Form 1 application, which can take police several days to process.
A number of legal experts and Labor's own MPs have called out the broad nature of the laws.
One particular issue is that how 'near' a person must be to a place of worship before police can issue a move on order is difficult to say, and is at the discretion of police. If someone ignores a police officer's move on order and is charged, it would then be up to the courts to determine.
'This is why the law is so bad because it is not precise,' says David Mejia-Canales, a senior human rights lawyer at the Human Rights Law Centre.
'It's very difficult for a person on the street, or the cops for that matter, to know with certainty whether anyone is breaking the law or not.'
A number of major protest sites are near places of worship. This includes Hyde Park, where weekly pro-Palestine rallies are held, Sydney's Town Hall and the supreme court.
Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email
Criticism was also raised in Labor ranks during a fiery caucus meeting last week. One MP attempted to amend the law so that it was specific to protest targeting places of worship. However, this was voted down.
On Thursday, Minns was asked for a response to another Labor MP saying the laws were the most draconian anti-protest measures in decades. That was 'hyperbole', the premier said.
'There are protests, they take place almost on a weekly basis … However, we have to balance the right to protest with people's rights to be free from vilification,' Minns said.
Minns has also said he does not believe the broad nature of the laws has left them open to misuse.
'We do put a lot of trust in NSW police, and I believe that they exercise it judiciously.'
The NSW Bar Association has agreed with the government that the laws strike the right balance between the right to freedom of religion and the right to freedom of expression.
The government has also passed a bill that makes it a criminal offence to intentionally and publicly incite hatred towards another person, or group of people, on the grounds of race.
After backlash that the scope of the laws are limited to race, the government will also undertake a six-month review to determine if the laws should be expanded to include other vulnerable groups, such as the LGBTQ+ community.
'They will make a difference,' Minns told reporters on Thursday ahead of the laws passing. 'We believe they're essential in sending that clear and unambiguous message that we won't tolerate racism.'
The Executive Council of Australian Jewry has supported the laws as an important step in stemming violence, but argued the scope of the laws should be widened to cover incidents that do not occur in public.
However, the Human Rights Law Centre has questioned whether the laws will make a difference.
'There is no evidence that the law will address the recent spate of antisemitic incidents in NSW or the disturbing rise of neo-Nazi and far-right extremist activity,' says the senior lawyer Arif Hussein.
'Governments should be prioritising investigating the nature of these incidents, before passing rushed and punitive laws, without proper community consultation.'
The Racial Justice Centre agrees, stating: 'These laws do not appropriately respond to the growing threat of racial hatred in Australia.'
The NSW Bar Association has also opposed the laws. It says it agrees with a November review by the Law Reform Commission that consulted widely with faith and legal groups and recommended not broadening the laws or introducing other offences to curb public incitement of hatred.
'The association shares the concerns expressed by the NSW Law Reform Commission in its recent review of serious racial and religious vilification, that terms such as 'hatred' introduce imprecision and subjectivity into the criminal law,' its president, Ruth Higgins, says.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
What Scottish Labour's by-election win really means
As both the SNP and Labour struggled to adjust to this new challenge, activists and journalists on the ground started to pick up a swell of support for Reform. By the time there were a couple of weeks left to go, even some Labour sources were briefing they might be pushed into third place. In that context it's easy to view Labour's victory as a stunning reversal and a resumption of Sarwar's journey to Bute House after a brief stumble. Whilst this is undeniably a positive outcome for them, I would caution about getting too carried away. Under the headlines, this result is caveats all the way down. First caveat: not all constituencies are equally important for all parties. Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse is a must-win for Labour in a way it wasn't for the SNP. In 2021, the SNP's national lead over Labour on the constituency vote was approximately 26%. In this seat it was about half as wide at roughly 13%. Read more: That means this was relatively low hanging fruit and had Labour failed to win they'd have been in truly dire straits. Having won it, we need to look closely at the margin, and 2% is real skin of your teeth stuff. A Rutherglen and Hamilton West style trouncing this is not. Given the figures we're working with from 2021 that would imply something like an 11% lead for the SNP nationally. That's pretty much in line with national polling, perhaps a smidge narrower but not to an extent that would make a substantial difference. If these kinds of shifts were replicated across the country, we'd still expect Labour to win fewer than 10 constituency MSPs versus around 50 for the SNP. Even after list seats are accounted for that'd likely mean at least twice as many SNP seats as Labour. Second caveat: by-elections are typically harder on the SNP than Labour. Although turnout here was surprisingly high, it was still down more than a quarter. The SNP's comparatively youthful and less affluent voter base are more likely to stay at home than Labour's. Differential turnout alone could help the SNP's chances of regaining the seat. Third caveat: that's especially true considering the presence of the Greens and Scottish Socialist Party. The nearly 4% of the vote the two of them picked up will have largely come from the SNP. I would be astonished if either party contested this constituency at the full election, and therefore those votes will be up for grabs. Fourth caveat: voters don't move neatly within constitutional blocs, and certainly not right now. For the SNP to have beaten Labour in this scenario, they'd have needed nearly two-thirds of all votes cast for competing Pro-Independence parties, and for Labour to get none. Transfer patterns from local elections suggest something more like 50-60% to the SNP and 10-20% to Labour had these smaller parties not stood. In other words, that's still short what the SNP would have needed to win. The absence of these parties next May will help the SNP, certainly, but won't make the difference alone. Fifth caveat: Reform UK probably won't do as well next time. By-elections are famous for voters giving the government a kicking, and they had two governments to stick the boot into. Reform also won't be able to dedicate the same resource to this seat, especially given Banffshire and Buchan Coast would be a cleverer bet for a winnable constituency. With Reform averaging about 16%-17% of the constituency vote at the moment, I simply don't believe their 'true' level of support in this seat is 26%. That's too high if polling is accurate, but entirely credible for a by-election. Whilst Reform are drawing some formerly SNP support, it'll be Labour that benefit more from a weaker performance next time, shoring up this win. Looking beyond the top three, it's no surprise that the other major parties barely registered. The Conservatives were narrowly spared the indignity of a deposit loss, but it's clear that Reform are on track to displace them across huge chunks of the country. Right now they are cruising towards the loss of half of their seats, a complete reversal of the big Davidson-era revival. Both the Greens and Lib Dems had zero expectations beyond the knowledge they'd be tactically squeezed, and I see nothing in their results to either enthuse or worry them. It'd have been a different story if they'd held their deposits or been overtaken by a fringe candidate, but otherwise this isn't a seat they'd be trying to pile on the votes in anyway. With 11 months still to go until the big day, and for all the drama of the campaign and the count, this by-election has ultimately done little more than tell us what we already knew. We knew Labour have gone so far into reverse they are losing support even versus 2021. We knew that is helping to mitigate a much more substantial collapse in the SNP's support. We knew Reform were on the rise. We knew Scottish politics was increasingly fragmented. There's still a long way to go and much that could change ahead of next May. For now though, be wary of narratives ascribing too much import to a by-election few ordinary voters will remember happened by the end of summer. Allan Faulds runs Ballot Box Scotland which provides data and analysis from Scottish polling and elections
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Hamas's ‘last man standing' faces fight to keep control of Gaza
Among Israel's spies, he is known as 'the ghost'. He closely supervised some of the worst massacres of the Oct 7 Hamas attack, and in the months since has played a key role in holding the terror group together in the face of the IDF's assault. Now, as the presumed new Hamas commander in Gaza, Izz al-Din al-Haddad holds the fate of the hostages and, to a large extent, the entire Strip in his blood-stained hands. 'He was always recognised by our people as one of the more capable commanders,' said Maj Gen Yaakov Amidror, Israel's former national security advisor. 'He is cautious. They're all cautious, but he's had some luck as well. He never made the mistake that allowed us to kill him.' Maj Gen Amidror speaks ruefully – Israel is believed to have tried to assassinate al-Haddad six times since 2008. Eighteen months into the longest war in the Jewish state's history, he is now believed to be the last man standing of the five brigade commanders on the eve of Oct 7. As such, when the IDF finally killed Mohammed Sinwar by flattening the tunnel in which he was hiding in the grounds of a hospital last month, al-Haddid, believed to be 55, assumed command. It follows the assassination of top-level figures Mohammed Deif in July 2024 and Yahya Sinwar, Hamas's supreme Gaza commander and the architect of Oct 7, in Oct that year. Al-Haddid takes over an almost unrecognisable force from the structured terror army that crossed the border to such devastating effect in Oct 2023. Hamas now resembles more of a guerrilla movement, with small, independent units – a handful of gunmen each – popping up in the rubble with light weapons and explosives. But, as this month has proved, the group is still more than capable of killing IDF troops, ensuring the war grinds on as Israel expands its new seize-hold-and-demolish strategy, with tragic effects for civilians. And, of course, Hamas still holds dozens of hostages, 20 of whom are thought to be alive. Last weekend, the group rejected an Israel-endorsed proposal generated by Steve Witkoff, Donald Trump's Middle East envoy, that would have freed 10 over a 60-day ceasefire – but, crucially, with no guarantee of a full Israeli withdrawal and an end to the war. For some in Israel's intelligence community, this had al-Haddad's hardline fingerprints all over it. According to analysts, his decades living in the shadows, plus the loss of two sons to Israeli fire in the last 18 months, places him in the front rank of Islamist fanaticism. But, with Israel committed to seizing 75 per cent of the strip in under two months, the veteran terrorist may soon be forced to revisit his choice. 'The most crucial decision he has to make is whether he goes for a ceasefire that will give him the time to reorganise his forces,' said Maj Gen Amidror, now at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America. 'He would have to pay by releasing some hostages. 'If not, the IDF will – slowly, slowly – come into these areas; Hamas will lose ground and people. 'It's down to his judgement.' IDF advances in Khan Younis The IDF made a major push in the southern city of Khan Younis this week, discovering, they said, an arsenal of rocket parts. Intense activity is also underway in Gaza City and its suburbs, such as Jabalia, traditionally a Hamas stronghold hiding an extensive tunnel network. An added challenge for the new commander will be how to keep control of a desperate civilian population, for whom hunger is now proving a more potent force than fear, with aid cut off for nearly three months. During the two months of the last ceasefire, al-Haddad was handed the task of rebuilding Hamas's civilian and military infrastructure. Israel contends that, with the traditional NGO-led aid system cut off, bar a 'trickle of UN trucks', that job is now harder, as Hamas cannot steal the food and use it to control the population. Government spokesmen argue that social media bears this out. They point to increasingly blood-curdling warnings against 'looting' on Hamas-linked accounts, plus videos of so-called 'field executions' – in reality, civilians being summarily gunned down in the street, or, in one recent case, tortured to death on camera. Even during times of less violence, it is difficult to get accurate data on civilian attitudes to Hamas within the Strip. But a series of protests in recent weeks has led some analysts to believe that ordinary Gazans' fear of Hamas was waning, with at least one ringleader brutally murdered in the aftermath. Despite its seeming omnipotence in Gaza since 2007, Hamas has never been the only armed group in the Strip. So-called 'clans' – some with links to other terror groups like Isis, some more or less organised crime groups, some just armed families, and some all three – are also gaining power as the situation destabilises. On Thursday, Benjamin Netanyahu admitted that Israel was arming at least one of them, a militia under the command of an Arab bedouin called Yasser Abu Shabab, despite his group's alleged links to drug dealing and arms smuggling. Such groups are already playing a role in seizing aid. If, thanks indirectly to Israeli support, they become better at it than Hamas, they could hasten the terror group's demise – although how that would improve the immediate situation for the population is unclear. Maj Gen Amidror warned against premature celebration. 'What we see with these [torture] videos is all the effort not to lose their grip,' he said. 'But I don't think they have lost their grip yet.' Reports suggest a new unit of around 5,000 gunmen called the 'executive force', a name salvaged from a similar outfit 20 years ago, has been unleashed to try to keep control. A regional security official summed up al-Haddad's position to the Hebrew press last week. 'He is one of the last and only leaders to have remained on the ground in Gaza, which means that the pressure he is under is tremendous,' he said. 'If no deal is reached, he doesn't want to go down in history as the last leader to oversee Gaza while it was falling apart under Israeli control. On the other hand, he needs to show that he is a leader.' Within Hamas, al-Haddad certainly has the stature to lead. He joined the group as a young man, more or less at its inception in 1987. From there he rose to become a platoon commander; eventually a battalion commander. By 2023, he was in command of the Gaza Brigade, based in and around Gaza City in the north of the Strip. As such, he was one of a small number of senior figures who knew the plans for Operation Al-Aqsa Flood (Hamas's codename for the Oct 7 attack) in advance. On the evening of Oct 6, he gathered his senior commanders. The orders he then handed out resulted in some of the most high-profile atrocities of the incursion, such as the attack on the IDF's Nahal Oz base, where more than 60 soldiers and 15 civilians were killed after it was overrun. Now, this famously cautious man who, unlike some of his terror comrades, avoided media appearance, has his face on leaflets being dropped by the IDF and Shin Bet into Gaza with crosshairs superimposed around it. Referencing the Sinwar brothers, Deif and Ismail Haniyeh, the group's overall leader until he was assassinated in Tehran last year, the leaflets' Hebrew and Arabic captions assured the population that al-Haddad would soon be 'reunited' with his friends. No one can foretell what military effect that would have, but it would – in one sense – close a chapter on Israel's darkest ever day.
Spectator
6 hours ago
- Spectator
Erin Patterson's mushroom murder case is Australia's Trial of the Century
Since its general election a month ago, Australia's politics have endured their biggest upheaval in fifty years. Its Labor government was re-elected by a massive majority, when just months ago it was in danger of being tossed out, and the conservative opposition parties are in existential turmoil and even briefly severed their coalition. Yet Australia's epicentre of interest this past month hasn't been the nation's capital, Canberra. Instead, it's been Morwell, a dying industrial town in the Gippsland region of the state of Victoria. There, Australia's Trial of the Century is playing out a sordid tale of love, hate, lust and intrigue. And mushrooms. Erin Patterson is a a frumpy, middle-aged woman, with a mien unfortunately drawn by nature as a mask of permanent misery. She has been estranged from her husband and his family for several years.
