'Hate' is subjective: whether speech or crime

Dear Minister Goldsmith, 

'Hate crime' laws suffer from the same unavoidable weakness as the 'hate speech' laws you have opposed: hate is a subjective term. Enabling the State to decide which crimes are 'hate crimes' and which are regular crimes invites a level of bias that is antithetical to the rule of law in New Zealand. 

Laws of this kind would be direct threats to Kiwis' freedoms of conscience and speech, and we call on you to reject any advice to implement them. 

'Hate' is an important term referencing a powerful emotion. Where individuals in our society are targets of hate, we must work to counter this hate and promote tolerance and inclusiveness. 

But 'hate' is an unavoidably subjective term; this is true whether it is used against word or action.

It is not the role of our criminal justice system or laws more generally to regulate this emotion. 

You have insisted that 'hate' speech laws would simply introduce a means to censor unpopular opinions. We applaud your decision to stop work on these proposals.  

'Hate' crime laws suffer from the same weaknesses and have no place in a liberal democracy that values freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the rule of law. 

Introducing 'hate' crime laws would see police and the judiciary tasked with deciding if one individual acted more criminally than another despite breaking the very same law, based on their motivations not their actions. 

We have no interest in defending criminal actions. If an individual breaks the law, they must be held accountable. But the law must apply impartially, regardless of who breaks it. Breaking the law for 'hate' shouldn't stand alone as a category any more than breaking the law for 'love'. Who is impartial enough to determine objectively when either of these would apply? 

Keep our laws impartial, the rule of law strong, and our speech and consciences free. 


We call on Hon. Paul Goldsmith, the Minister of Justice, to reject all advice to develop 'hate' crime legislation that would introduce unacceptable subjectivity into our laws, and be used to target unpopular perspectives and unorthodox beliefs. 

3,696 signature
Goal: 5000 signature

Will you sign?

Showing 2566 reactions

  • Gene Becconsall
    signed 2025-02-05 09:51:23 +1300
  • Daniel Peacock
    signed 2025-02-05 09:51:08 +1300
  • Andrew Tobin
    signed 2025-02-05 09:50:53 +1300
  • Alison Moodie
    signed 2025-02-05 09:50:48 +1300
    ‘Hate crime’ is straight out of George Orwell’s 1984. This book should be mandatory reading for every politician and every school child. Do you really want to create a fear driven Orwellian dystopia? Please prove that you are independent and act in the best interests of all Kiwis and do not introduce Hate Crime laws.
  • Peter Skinner
    signed 2025-02-05 09:50:34 +1300
  • Brian Boyd
    signed 2025-02-05 09:50:16 +1300
  • Bob Campbell
    signed 2025-02-05 09:49:54 +1300
    Define hate speech
  • Barry Mclauchlan
    signed 2025-02-05 09:49:24 +1300
  • Peter Hooper
    signed 2025-02-05 09:49:08 +1300
    I find the new laws proposed affence and will be open to obtuse by extreme people and party’s.
  • Daniel Breen
    signed 2025-02-05 09:49:01 +1300
  • Terrence Tustin
    signed 2025-02-05 09:48:23 +1300
  • Murray Downs
    signed 2025-02-05 09:48:11 +1300
    Hate is undefinable at law. It is a spiritual matter and needs spiritual solutions. The result of hate laws is a reason for a dictatorship, not a democracy. Stick to your knitting- economy, health and real life education, supporting freedom of speech and public safety from real crime. Who is advising otherwise? Hate laws is just another example of wasting public money.
  • Allan Fergusson
    signed 2025-02-05 09:47:51 +1300
  • Sandra Hoekstra
    signed 2025-02-05 09:47:46 +1300
  • Peter Due
    signed 2025-02-05 09:47:28 +1300
    Will they never learn from other’s mistakes
  • Lorraine O’MAlley
    signed 2025-02-05 09:47:17 +1300
  • Roy Menzies
    signed 2025-02-05 09:47:11 +1300
    Hey Paul- don’t become another Jacinda or Luxon. National under Luxon will voted out at the next election. WE need David Seymour in charge.
  • Jane Dowson
    signed 2025-02-05 09:46:37 +1300
  • Dave Miller
    signed 2025-02-05 09:46:27 +1300
  • Gerald Jacobson
    signed 2025-02-05 09:46:05 +1300
  • Gifford Melrose
    signed 2025-02-05 09:45:45 +1300
  • Peter Dunlop
    signed 2025-02-05 09:45:43 +1300
  • Patricia Wozencraft
    signed 2025-02-05 09:45:42 +1300
  • Mike Roberts
    signed 2025-02-05 09:45:41 +1300
  • Euan RossTaylor
    signed 2025-02-05 09:45:25 +1300
  • Philip Griffith
    signed 2025-02-05 09:45:12 +1300
  • Ian Hawken
    signed 2025-02-05 09:44:40 +1300
  • Leo Bourke
    signed 2025-02-05 09:44:21 +1300
  • Robyn McCrory
    signed 2025-02-05 09:44:18 +1300
  • Daryl Waller
    signed 2025-02-05 09:44:11 +1300

You might also like: