Australia Does Not Have US-Style Free Speech Rights Due to Multiculturalism: NSW Premier

Premier Chris Minns was responding to concerns that new hate speech laws against anti-Semitism will impact free speech rights.  

New South Wales Labor Premier Chris Minns speaks to media during a press conference in Sydney, Australia on Jan. 29, 2025. AAP Image/Steven Saphore

Weeks after passing new hate crime laws, New South Wales (NSW) Premier Chris Minns has defended the reforms, arguing they are necessary to protect Australia’s multicultural society.

Critics, however, claim the laws restrict free speech and could have broader implications.

Facing criticism, Minns highlighed Australia’s unique multicultural landscape.

“Australia doesn’t have the free speech laws that are in place in America, and for one very important reason: because we have developed a multicultural community where it doesn’t matter what your faith or your religion is, you must live side by side with your neighbour in peace,” he told reporters.

The NSW government recently passed laws criminalising racial hatred, the public display of Nazi symbols, and harassment at places of worship.

The move follows a rise in anti-Semitic incidents, including synagogue vandalism and violent confrontations.

Similar federal legislation, the Criminal Code Amendment (Hate Crimes) Bill 2024, was enacted last month, expanding national protections against hate crimes based on race, religion, sexual orientation, and gender identity.

Civil Liberties Groups Raise Concerns

While the laws aim to curb hate-fuelled incidents, civil liberties organisations argue they could infringe on free speech.

The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) warned they might set a precedent for limiting expression.

“While intended to prevent harm and promote equality, they raise questions about where to draw the line between harmful speech and legitimate expression,” the Commission stated on Feb. 20.

It urged a parliamentary review to ensure a balanced approach.

The NSW Council for Civil Liberties (NSWCCL) also criticised the legislation. President Timothy Roberts argued it prioritises punitive measures over community-led solutions.

“You cannot arrest your way into social cohesion. This reactionary response from the premier will not make people safe,” he said, calling for stronger investment in programs addressing racism, online hate, and radicalisation.

Greens MP and justice spokesperson Sue Higginson criticised the Minns Labor Government, stating it has disregarded evidence and expert opinions.

“Racism and acts of hate must never be tolerated, they must always be called out. We must always strive towards a more cohesive and inclusive society, but these new laws are extreme and completely unnecessary. The laws are overreach and the only purpose they serve is to further criminalise peaceful and legitimate protests,” she said.

Calls for Broader Protections

Advocacy groups argue the new laws do not go far enough in protecting all vulnerable communities.

Equality Australia CEO Anna Brown urged the government to expand the bill’s scope.

“There is no reason why this further offence couldn’t be applied to all attributes currently protected by the law. Any community that is being targeted by hate deserves to be protected under the law,” she said

Meanwhile, the Human Rights Law Centre raised concerns about the law’s potential impact on peaceful assembly.

“The laws, if passed, would have wide-ranging implications for the right to peaceful assembly and may lead to the criminalisation of conduct which does not impact on the rights of people to practice their religion and be protected from racial or religious hatred,” it stated.

As debate continues, the government remains firm on its stance, insisting the laws are necessary to uphold public safety and social harmony.

However, calls for amendments and a broader review signal that the conversation on free speech and hate crime legislation is far from over.