Key Takeaways
- A New South Wales parliamentary inquiry has been told that banning phrases such as "globalise the intifada" may disproportionately affect Muslim Australians, including Palestinian and Arab communities.
- The Australian National Imams Council and the Palestine Action Group have expressed concerns that such a ban could import repressive models from overseas and undermine social cohesion.
- The inquiry is considering measures to prohibit slogans that incite hatred, but some groups have warned that this could have unintended consequences, such as restricting freedom of political communication.
- The NSW Jewish Board of Deputies and the Executive Council of Australian Jewry have been granted an extension to make their submissions, which are expected to support a ban on the phrase.
- The phrase "globalise the intifada" has been associated with indiscriminate acts of violence and terrorism by some members of the Jewish community, but others argue that it has a variety of meanings and contexts.
Introduction to the Inquiry
The New South Wales parliamentary inquiry into measures to prohibit slogans that incite hatred has been told that banning phrases such as "globalise the intifada" may have unintended consequences. The Australian National Imams Council has warned that such a ban could disproportionately affect Muslim Australians, including Palestinian and Arab communities. This concern has been echoed by the Palestine Action Group, which argues that a ban on the chant risks importing repressive models from overseas, particularly from the United Kingdom.
The Phrase "Globalise the Intifada"
The phrase "globalise the intifada" has been the subject of much controversy. It originated from the Arabic word for uprising or "shaking off" and has been used to refer to two uprisings by Palestinians against Israel in 1987 and 2000. However, some members of the Jewish community strongly associate the word intifada with indiscriminate acts of violence and terrorism. The director of the Australian Centre for Jewish Civilisation, David Slucki, has called the phrase "offensive" and "threatening". On the other hand, the Australian National Imams Council and the Palestine Action Group argue that the phrase does not have a single or fixed meaning and is employed in a variety of political, cultural, and human rights contexts.
Submissions to the Inquiry
Several organizations have made submissions to the inquiry, including the Australian National Imams Council, the Palestine Action Group, and the NSW Council for Civil Liberties. The Australian National Imams Council has argued that content-based bans risk arbitrary enforcement and may disproportionately impact particular communities and advocates. The Palestine Action Group has rejected the suggestion that the chant "globalise the intifada" is threatening in any way and has drawn attention to the UK, where human rights groups have condemned the announcement by the Metropolitan and Greater Manchester police that they would arrest protesters who chant or display the phrase.
Concerns about the Ban
The NSW Council for Civil Liberties has warned that the banning of slogans has the potential to undermine social cohesion as well as the implied freedom of political communication and various international human rights treaties. The council has asked how community expectations regarding what conduct is threatening would be determined by a court, given that there is no current legal definition of "community". Prof Anne Twomey, a constitutional law expert, has also made a submission to the inquiry, which is expected to be released by the committee.
Next Steps
The inquiry, which is being run by the Labor-majority committee on law and safety, is expected to hand its final report to the government on 31 January. The NSW Jewish Board of Deputies and the Executive Council of Australian Jewry have been granted an extension to make their submissions, which are expected to support a ban on the phrase. The government has indicated that it intends to introduce legislation to ban the phrase, but the inquiry’s report will likely play a significant role in shaping the final form of the legislation. As the inquiry comes to a close, it remains to be seen how the government will balance the need to protect communities from hate speech with the need to protect freedom of political communication and social cohesion.