Australia's rushed hate speech laws highlight risks of emotion-driven legislation

21 January 2026 
 
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

Australia's rushed hate speech laws highlight risks of emotion-driven legislation 

“New Zealand should learn from the problems emerging in Australia's new anti-hate legislation, not seek to replicate them, says the Free Speech Union. 

"Australia's Parliament passed sweeping new laws in an emergency late-night session with barely three days of public consultation," said Jillaine Heather, Chief Executive of the Free Speech Union. The Bondi tragedy was horrific and antisemitism is a genuine problem. But when legal experts, Jewish community groups, and civil liberties organisations all warn that legislation is rushed and overbroad, that's worth paying attention to. 

"The most concerning element is the power to designate 'prohibited hate groups' without procedural fairness or judicial oversight. A minister can now ban organisations based on past lawful speech, with no right of appeal for the group itself. That's a significant departure from rule of law principles. 

"We're also troubled by how 'hate' has become a term of criminal liability despite being inherently subjective. As Australian faith leaders noted in their joint submission, hate 'is perceived differently by different people' and shouldn't be the basis for criminal sanctions. 

"Even some of the legislation's intended beneficiaries raised concerns. The Jewish Council of Australia warned that 'rushing through sweeping criminal laws is not going to make Jews safer' and that racism is better addressed through 'building trust and solidarity across communities' rather than expanding police powers." 

New Zealand implications 

The Free Speech Union notes that within hours of Australia's laws passing, Race Relations Commissioner Dr Melissa Derby was quoted saying there would be "room for expanding" hate speech laws in New Zealand. 

"We appreciate that Dr Derby acknowledged these issues are complex and that there are a variety of views even within affected communities," Heather said. "That nuance is important. But successive New Zealand governments have already examined and rejected expanded hate speech laws because of free expression concerns. 

"The Law Commission is currently reviewing hate crime provisions, which is separate from hate speech. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith has been clear that the Government 'opposed and will not continue Labour's proposed hate speech laws, because they would have undermined free speech.' 

"What happened in Australia demonstrates exactly why that caution is warranted. Legislation drafted in days, passed in a late-night sitting, with provisions so problematic that even the government had to abandon its racial vilification clause to get the rest through Parliament. 

"Any changes in this area, need be subject to genuine consultation, careful drafting, and proper parliamentary scrutiny. The alternative is laws that create uncertainty for ordinary people, criminalise contested opinions, without making anyone safer or preventing actual violence."