Government unveils hate speech and gun reform bill after Bondi terror attack

The federal government has released draft legislation aimed at strengthening hate speech laws and tightening gun controls in response to the antisemitic terror attack at Bondi Beach that killed 15 people and injured dozens more.

The draft legislation, tabled alongside the announcement, combines new hate crime offences with gun law reforms. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the package addressed both the ideology and the means behind the attack.

 

“The terrorists at Bondi Beach had hatreds in their minds but guns in their hands, and this bill will get rid of both of those issues,” he said.

The hate speech component of the bill strengthens existing offences relating to the public display of prohibited symbols. It also expands the definition of a hate symbol to include those used to identify prohibited hate groups.

The bill formally defines a hate crime as conduct that causes or threatens serious harm to a targeted person or their property, or kills them, because of their race, national origin, or ethnic origin.

Courts will be required to treat offences as more serious where the conduct is motivated wholly or partly by racial, national, or ethnic hatred.

Albanese also confirmed a National Day of Mourning for the victims will be held on Thursday, 22 January, with flags flown at half-mast at all Commonwealth buildings across Australia.

The bill introduces a new aggravated offence where religious officials, spiritual leaders, or pastoral figures commit existing extremism-related crimes. That offence carries a maximum penalty of 12 years’ imprisonment.

Further new offences include directing the activities of, or recruiting for, a prohibited hate group, with penalties of up to 15 years in prison. Being a member of a prohibited hate group would carry a maximum sentence of seven years.

The legislation also links explicitly to a new national gun buyback scheme. Proposed firearm reforms include tighter background checks, expanded intelligence-sharing with ASIO, and stricter import controls on high-risk firearms.

Attorney-General Michelle Rowland said the package represented the strongest Commonwealth action to date. “This is a legislative package to combat hate. Once passed, these will be the toughest hate speech laws the Commonwealth has ever had,” she said.

The bill will be examined by a parliamentary inquiry on Tuesday. Nationals leader David Littleproud criticised the decision to combine hate speech and gun reforms in a single bill, arguing the two areas should be dealt with separately.

The Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ) welcomed the tabling of the draft legislation while warning that significant shortcomings could limit its effectiveness.

ECAJ co-chief executive Peter Wertheim said the need for reform had been highlighted not only by the Bondi attack but also by the climate of hatred that preceded it. He noted that for more than 15 years, civil liberties arguments had been used to burden hate speech laws with elements that were effectively impossible to prove.

“The result has been that people engaged in notorious examples of hate speech have not been held to account,” Wertheim said. “With some existing offences, there have been no prosecutions at all, let alone convictions. It is plain that the current hate speech laws are not fit for purpose, and social cohesion has been damaged as a consequence.”

He described the draft legislation as a significant step forward, pointing to the creation of a new serious vilification offence. Under that offence, a prosecutor would only need to prove that an accused person knowingly promoted racial hatred, rather than proving incitement of an audience.

“Many previous hate speech cases failed to result in prosecutions because of the impossibility of proving incitement beyond reasonable doubt,” Wertheim said.

However, the ECAJ identified four serious shortcomings in the way the offence has been drafted. It said the offence is limited to hatred based on race, leaving people targeted on the basis of attributes such as gender identity, sexual orientation, age, or disability without equivalent protection.

The organisation also criticised the exclusion of reckless conduct, warning that requiring proof of intention beyond reasonable doubt may still set the threshold too high.

It opposed exemptions for quoting or referencing religious texts, describing the concept of a religious exemption for racial hatred as outdated. “Invoking religion as an excuse to dehumanise and mistreat others simply on the basis of who they are must surely be a thing of the past,” Wertheim said.

The ECAJ further warned that the offence would only be made out if a prosecutor could prove the conduct would put a reasonable member of the targeted group in fear for their safety. It argued that guilt should be determined by the offender’s conduct, with impact considered at sentencing.

While welcoming measures aimed at constraining hate groups, the organisation said the bill does not yet fully address how such groups operate through informal structures and intermediaries.

“Where such conduct is carried out by those in positions of influence, it must be viewed especially seriously,” Wertheim said.

The ECAJ said it hoped the legislation would be passed and strengthened through the inquiry process, and that antisemitism, hate, and extremism in Australia would be effectively confronted.

with AAP