Groups launch court challenge to NSW laws restricting protests after terror attacks | Australia news
A constitutional challenge has been launched in New South Wales against controversial laws restricting protest actions for up to three months following terrorist incidents, which were introduced in December following the Bondi attack.
The Blak Caucus, Palestine Action Group (PAG) and Jews Against Occupation ’48 groups appealed to the NSW supreme court on Wednesday, arguing in subpoenas that the laws were invalid because they “impermissibly burdened the implied constitutional freedom of communication on government and political matters”.
The co-applicants announced their intention to challenge laws preventing the police from authorizing protests following a public assembly restriction declaration (Pard). The laws were rushed through parliament after the Bondi massacre last month.
In December, PAG organizer Josh Lees accused the government of taking away the right to peaceful protest with “no evidence” that it would make anyone safer.
Wednesday’s challenge comes after NSW police commissioner Mal Lanyon announced on Tuesday that a 14-day declaration under Christmas Eve powers for Sydney’s CBD, south-west and north-west police districts would be extended until January 20. He cited ongoing community safety concerns but said no other intelligence had come to light to motivate the move.
The groups expressed concerns that the declaration, which could be extended for a total of 90 days, could affect the Occupation Day rallies expected to be held on January 26. When asked about that possibility on Tuesday, Lanyon said “it’s too early to think about it.”
Describing civil liberties concerns as “overblown”, NSW premier Chris Minns said the government was “alive to the threat of a challenge” but was “confident the laws will withstand a constitutional challenge”.
Sign up: AÜ Breaking News email
Constitutional law experts have expressed uncertainty about the success of a challenge to powers that do not outright ban public gatherings but prevent them from being permitted under NSW’s Form 1 system. Authorized protests protect against prosecution for crimes such as obstructing pedestrians and traffic.
The prime minister and the police commissioner insisted the laws were “peaceful” and did not restrict static gatherings, but groups argued that the changes, which also gave police powers to act at unauthorized protests, effectively banned all protests.
After the declaration was extended on Tuesday, NSW Civil Liberties Council chief executive Timothy Roberts told Guardian Australia the laws had an “extraordinary chilling effect that is overshadowed by police discretion about what kinds of protests are and are not appropriate”.
This is the latest challenge to protest laws introduced by the Minns government. In October, the NSW supreme court ruled that a law giving police powers against protesters “in or near” a place of worship was unconstitutional, following an appeal launched by the PAG.
The group successfully challenged a police decision not to allow a march on the Sydney Harbor Bridge in August, but lost an appeal against a ban on marching to the Opera House forecourt in October, with the court citing “extreme” safety concerns.
The appeal’s court date could be decided at a preliminary hearing scheduled for Thursday in Sydney.
