In a fervent response to last night’s protest in Sydney, Chris Minns expressed strong disapproval of the demonstrators’ chants of “globalise the intifada,” a controversial phrase that the New South Wales government is considering banning. His concerns centered around the disturbing imagery and messages present during the protest.
Minns questioned, “How is it possible for a protest in our state to display a swastika tattooed on a Star of David on a poster right in the heart of the city? Or to feature images of the Ayatollah, Iran’s leader? There were shirts with slogans like ‘Death to the IDF’ [Israel Defense Forces] and signs claiming ‘All Zionists are neo-Nazis’.”
Amidst this heated atmosphere, Josh Lees, representing the Palestine Action Group Sydney, has voiced opposition to new protest laws, arguing they are unconstitutional. In response, three groups are preparing to legally challenge these regulations.
Reflecting on the potential implications of such protests, Minns pondered, “Can we truly say that protests bearing such signs have no influence on our culture, societal climate, or even incite extreme actions within our community?” He further warned, “In some cases, those organizing these protests may be unleashing forces beyond their control.”
“How can we say that protests that have these signs have no bearing on either the culture, the temperature or even extreme actions within our community?”
“In some instances, the organisers of these protests are unleashing forces that they can’t control.”
Premier condemns ‘troll-like’ response
Josh Lees from Palestine Action Group Sydney said a ban may embolden people to use it: “I’ve never chanted this in the last two years. So the fact that Chris Minns wants to ban it might make it popular.”
Greens NSW MLC Sue Higginson said her party would stand with the fundamental right to protest, warning the changes would “feed dissent”.
Premier ‘hopeful’ of new protest laws passing
A legal challenge will be brought by the Palestinian Action Group, Jews Against the Occupation and the First Nations-led Blak Caucus.
They have raised particular concerns about the impact the laws could have on Invasion Day rallies in January, which would fall within the three-month window following the Bondi Beach terrorist attack.
‘Unconstitutional’ and ‘anti-democratic’, say challengers
“It places us Jews in the crosshairs,” Berkon said on Tuesday. “These laws are not about protecting Jews … they’re not even about protecting Israel.”
Nick Hanna, the criminal defence lawyer representing the groups, said while they recognised the need for law reform following the Bondi Beach attack, the proposed protest changes were “unconstitutional” and violated the right to freedom of speech.
NSW Premier Chris Minns has defended his government’s crackdown on protests, saying there was a “tinderbox” in the community and the new laws were aimed at protecting public safety. Source: AAP / Dominic Lorrimer
Josh Lees from Palestine Action Group Sydney said the antisemitic attack was being conflated with protest movements more broadly, particularly pro-Palestinian demonstrations.
“These laws will take away the rights of everyone in NSW to gather together as a community, to express their views, to express their opposition to whatever government policies they oppose, to demand change — all the things that have been so crucial to our democracy.”
What would the new laws change?
The proposed legislation covers two key areas following the Bondi Beach terrorist attack: gun laws and protest laws.
Protest laws
The changes include restricting the authorisation of public assemblies in designated areas for three months following a terrorist incident — effectively banning them.
Police would be given new powers to demand a person remove their face covering at a public assembly if they believe the person has committed an offence.
Gun laws
It would also impose a complete ban on firearms capable of using belt-fed magazines, restrict access to certain firearms to primary producers only, and strengthen firearms licence checks and accountability.
