NSW Parliamentary Inquiry Proposes Conditional Ban on Controversial Phrase
A New South Wales parliamentary inquiry is set to recommend a ban on the phrase 'globalise the intifada', but only in specific circumstances where it is used to incite violence. The draft report, confirmed by inquiry chair and Labor MP Edmond Atalla, stops short of calling for an outright prohibition on the statement or recommending bans on other phrases such as 'from the river to the sea'.
Opposition Criticises Inquiry Recommendations as Confusing
The NSW opposition has expressed strong dissatisfaction with the draft recommendations, describing them as confusing and unnecessary. Shadow Attorney General Damien Tudehope stated that the opposition was 'deeply unimpressed' with the proposal, arguing that it merely criminalises conduct already unlawful under existing provisions of the Crimes Act.
'If conduct is already unlawful under existing provisions, this recommendation adds nothing except confusion, and risks giving the false impression that other uses are acceptable,' Tudehope remarked.
Inquiry Process and Timeline Under Scrutiny
The inquiry, which was open for public submissions for just three weeks over the holiday period, has faced criticism for being rushed and having a predetermined outcome. More than 500 individual submissions will not be published, with only 150 of 700 submissions made public. Inquiry deputy chair and Labor MP Hugh McDermott defended the process, stating that committee members had been in discussions nearly every day and had read all submissions.
The inquiry's report is due to be published to the state government on Friday, allowing time for legislation to be voted on after parliament returns next week. Premier Chris Minns has repeatedly signalled his support for a ban on the phrase following the Bondi terror attack, but emphasised that the inquiry was independent and that he would have more to say once the report is received.
Legal and Constitutional Concerns Raised
Constitutional law expert Professor Anne Twomey highlighted the difficult legal issues arising from proposals to ban particular political chants. In her submission, she noted that it was unrealistic to expect a parliamentary committee, operating over a short holiday break with no oral hearings, to develop constitutionally challenge-proof legislation. However, she later acknowledged that the conditional recommendation would be 'constitutionally much safer than an outright ban'.
NSW already has offences under sections 93Z and 93ZAA of the Crimes Act for inciting violence and inciting hatred on racial grounds. McDermott argued that a new offence specifically naming 'globalise the intifada' was necessary to increase the likelihood of prosecution, but only where it is used to incite violence. Defences for artistic, academic, and educational use of the phrase would be included.
Community Responses and International Context
Jewish community organisations, including the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies and the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, had called for the inquiry to create a new offence for what they termed 'hateful slogans'. In contrast, groups such as the Palestine Action Group, the Jewish Council of Australia, and the Australian National Imams Council rejected the notion that the phrases were inherently hateful or antisemitic, warning that a ban would curtail constitutional freedoms.
The inquiry also considered international practices, including those in the UK, where the phrase has not been banned outright but police have indicated intentions to arrest individuals calling for 'intifada' under existing offences. Recent charges in London for similar chants underscore the global relevance of the issue.
As the committee prepares for its final closed meeting, amendments to the draft recommendations remain possible. The outcome will likely influence broader discussions on hate speech laws and protest regulations in New South Wales.
