Inquiry to call for ban on ‘globalise the intifada’ in NSW – but only when used to ‘incite violence’ | New South Wales politics
A New South Wales parliamentary inquiry will recommend banning the phrase “globalising the intifada” when used to incite violence, but will not call for an outright ban on the phrase or recommend banning phrases such as “river to sea”.
The inquiry’s chairman, Labor MP Edmond Atalla, confirmed the draft recommendations to Guardian Australia ahead of the final closed meeting on Thursday.
Describing the inquiry as “rushed” and having a predetermined outcome, the NSW opposition said the recommendations were confusing and sought to criminalize behavior that was already illegal.
The inquiry will release its report to the state government on Friday for a vote on the legislation after parliament meets next week. It was only open to public submissions for three weeks, and more than 500 individual submissions will not be published.
Labor MP Hugh McDermott, deputy chair of the inquiry, said changes could be made by the Labor majority committee after the meeting. He defended the decision to conduct part of the investigation abroad during the holiday period, together with many committee members, including Atalla.
“[The committee has] “It is discussed almost every day,” he said.
Shadow attorney general Damien Tudehope said on Thursday he was “deeply unimpressed” by the opposition’s draft recommendation, which said it would “ban a slogan, but only in the circumstances already established by the Crimes Act”.
“If conduct is already illegal under existing provisions, this advice will introduce nothing but confusion and risks giving the false impression that other uses are acceptable.”
The phrase “globalize the intifada,” which means uprising or “total shake-out” in Arabic, is used by pro-Palestinian supporters to refer to the uprisings against Israel that began in 1987 and 2000. Some members of the Jewish community said this was a call to violence against them.
Sign up: AÜ Breaking News email
Both the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies and the Executive Council of Australian Jews (ECAJ) have called for the investigation to create a new offense for what they call “globalising the intifada” and “hateful slogans” such as “river to sea”, but the draft report does not recommend banning any other language.
Organizations such as the Palestine Action Group, the Jewish Council of Australia and the National Imams Council of Australia rejected the idea that these expressions were inherently hateful or anti-Semitic and said the ban would restrict constitutional freedoms.
In her submission to the inquiry this month, constitutional law expert Prof Anne Twomey said the proposal to ban certain political chants gave rise to “difficult legal issues that are not yet fully developed in areas of jurisprudence”.
“It is unrealistic to expect a parliamentary committee, with no oral hearings and possibly very little presentation from experts in the field, to come up with the desired constitutionally unobjectionable legislation in such a short period of time over the Christmas holiday break.”
On Thursday, Twomey told Guardian Australia that the recommendation “would be much safer constitutionally than an outright ban”.
NSW already has offenses under the NSW Crimes Code, s 93Z and 93ZAA, for inciting violence and inciting hatred on the basis of race, but McDermott said a new offense was needed to “globalise the intifada”, but only where it was used to incite violence.
“We believe calling it ‘globalize the intifada’ is more likely to lead to prosecution,” he said.
While it is not immediately clear how incitement to violence will be determined, defenses will exist for artistic, academic, and educational uses of the expression. Atalla suggested that the “historical context” of this statement would be sufficient.
“The slogan ‘Globalize the Intifada’ alone probably means nothing to most people, but it poses a threat to the Jewish people.”
NSW premier Chris Minns repeatedly signaled his desire to ban “globalising the intifada” after the Bondi attack. On Thursday he reiterated that the investigation was independent and said he did not expect the legislation to be tabled immediately when parliament restarts next week.
“This is a parliamentary inquiry. They will present their report. I will have more to say when the report is presented to us.”
McDermott said the committee process was “a first step” but said a shorter, closed-door investigation over the holiday period was justified by the Bondi attack.
Due to significant demands from the support of the Jewish community after December 14, the application deadlines to the Board of Representatives and ECAJ were extended.
McDermott also defended the decision to publish only 150 of 700 submissions. “It is not uncommon for committees to not publish every presentation,” he said, saying some people have asked for their own presentations not to be published.
“There are also things we don’t believe should be included in the report.”
Atalla will attend the final meeting via video link from abroad on Thursday afternoon. He said he was on a humanitarian mission to Namibia with the Mount Druitt church and that his work as president was not interrupted. Other committee members had attended previous meetings from abroad.
The committee had met twice before; the first on December 22 to determine the terms of reference for the investigation, and then on January 13 after the deadline for public submissions expired. McDermott said committee members read all 700 submissions, which ranged from one sentence to 30 to 40 pages.
It also called for consideration of existing hate speech laws, as well as “best practice” abroad, including in the UK. The phrase “globalize the intifada” has not been banned outright in the UK, but police have signaled their intention to arrest people calling for an “intifada” under existing offenses as part of a widespread crackdown on pro-Palestinian protests.
Three people who chanted slogans calling for an intifada at a protest in London in December were charged, the Metropolitan police said on Monday.
