New South Wales Government Urged to Ban Controversial Phrase "Globalise the Intifada" But Not Its Use in Peaceful Protests
A parliamentary inquiry into hate speech and free speech has recommended banning a specific phrase used by pro-Palestine supporters, but only if it is used to incite hatred or violence. The Labor-led committee's report, which will be voted on next week, calls for the government to clarify that chanting "globalise the intifada" in a public place is unlawful.
However, the inquiry has not recommended banning the phrase outright or recommending a ban on phrases such as "from the river to sea," which some Jewish community leaders have called for. The committee's chair, Edmond Atalla, explained that the proposal only targets the use of the phrase when it incites violence, while allowing peaceful protests and artistic uses.
The controversy surrounding the phrase has led to calls from both pro-Palestine and pro-Israel groups, with some arguing that a ban would curtail constitutional freedoms. The NSW Jewish Board of Deputies and Executive Council of Australian Jewry have advocated for a new offense for "hateful slogans," including the phrase in question.
Critics argue that the inquiry's recommendations are confusing and risk giving the impression that other uses of the phrases are acceptable under the law. The opposition has also criticized the inquiry as being rushed, with multiple committee members overseas during key meetings.
The inquiry process, which was initially intended to take place over several months, was condensed into a three-week period due to the urgency surrounding the Bondi attack, in which a Jewish man was killed by two assailants who allegedly shouted "globalise the intifada" before attacking him.
While the inquiry's final report has not been published yet, Labor leader Chris Minns has expressed support for its recommendations, and says he does not expect legislation to be tabled immediately. The committee has defended its decision to hold a shorter inquiry during the holiday period, citing the need for swift action on the issue.
A parliamentary inquiry into hate speech and free speech has recommended banning a specific phrase used by pro-Palestine supporters, but only if it is used to incite hatred or violence. The Labor-led committee's report, which will be voted on next week, calls for the government to clarify that chanting "globalise the intifada" in a public place is unlawful.
However, the inquiry has not recommended banning the phrase outright or recommending a ban on phrases such as "from the river to sea," which some Jewish community leaders have called for. The committee's chair, Edmond Atalla, explained that the proposal only targets the use of the phrase when it incites violence, while allowing peaceful protests and artistic uses.
The controversy surrounding the phrase has led to calls from both pro-Palestine and pro-Israel groups, with some arguing that a ban would curtail constitutional freedoms. The NSW Jewish Board of Deputies and Executive Council of Australian Jewry have advocated for a new offense for "hateful slogans," including the phrase in question.
Critics argue that the inquiry's recommendations are confusing and risk giving the impression that other uses of the phrases are acceptable under the law. The opposition has also criticized the inquiry as being rushed, with multiple committee members overseas during key meetings.
The inquiry process, which was initially intended to take place over several months, was condensed into a three-week period due to the urgency surrounding the Bondi attack, in which a Jewish man was killed by two assailants who allegedly shouted "globalise the intifada" before attacking him.
While the inquiry's final report has not been published yet, Labor leader Chris Minns has expressed support for its recommendations, and says he does not expect legislation to be tabled immediately. The committee has defended its decision to hold a shorter inquiry during the holiday period, citing the need for swift action on the issue.
. Like, can't we all just get along and talk about the issues without resorting to hate speech? I'm all for free speech, but when does it become a problem? The fact that there are groups on both sides calling for a ban shows how far this has gone and how much tension is building up. It's not like it's going to stop with just banning one phrase - what about the next? And isn't this a bit of an overreaction given the context of a recent attack? I guess you can never be too careful, but at the same time, we need to be careful not to stifle important conversations. 
I gotta say, this whole thing is a bit of a mess 
. On one hand, I get why the NSW government wants to crack down on hate speech and protect people from inciting violence. It's not okay to chant something that could lead to harm or hurt someone.
. It feels like they're trying to pick and choose which phrases are "hateful" vs. others. What's next? Are we gonna have a list of approved phrases that you can use in public? 
. But can we please have a more nuanced discussion about how to address these issues without sacrificing our constitutional freedoms in the process? 
I'm so over this phrase "globalise the intifada" 
it's already super problematic just by existing, but now they're trying to ban it outright? 
Like, come on! It's not like we need more laws regulating our free speech. Can't we just focus on actual hate crimes instead of policing every single phrase that might offend someone? 
And what about artistic uses or protests where people are literally showing support for the Palestinian cause? Are they just going to get arrested for exercising their right to free expression? 
like we have laws against inciting violence and hate speech but this specific phrase is still good to go? its not like people using it are thinking "oh yeah ill just globalize the intifada and then go for a peaceful protest afterwards lol" 
... isn't that the point of a public inquiry to address concerns, not create more confusion?
.
It's just so obvious that they're targeting a specific group with their proposed ban. I'm sure it has nothing to do with being PC or avoiding controversy... 
Anyway, I guess it's good that the inquiry is taking steps to clarify what constitutes hate speech, even if it feels like they're tiptoeing around some issues. 
. What if someone chants it during a protest, but then gets interrupted by someone else and says something even more inflammatory? 
. Maybe they should just come up with some clearer guidelines on what constitutes "hateful slogans" 
.