00:00Protest is a fundamental human right that's protected at international law and something
00:07that we can't take for granted here in Australia, however, it is something that must give way
00:13to other important rights and interests, including people's right to feel safe and for their
00:18right to be able to express their religious beliefs, so I think it's a matter of trying
00:23to design a law that's proportionate in its impact and protects freedoms but also people's
00:29liberty and their safety.
00:32And what would be proportionate in terms of a place of worship?
00:36Well I think enabling people to express themselves peacefully and to assemble peacefully to share
00:42views on matters of important public interest is important, however, it's possibly necessary
00:49to ensure safe access for people to places of worship and so it might be necessary to
00:55ensure that people are able to access these important places for their religious expression
01:02without fear of physical harm or verbal abuse.
01:07And so would you be comfortable with say a 100 metre radius or less or more?
01:13Well that kind of distance is something that the High Court's considered in a very different
01:18context in the terms of prohibitions of protest around places that undertake terminations
01:25of pregnancy and abortion, so that might be an indication that that kind of distance
01:31could be appropriate if the High Court's looking at a law like this, but the High Court would
01:36be really interested in the general impact of the law on people's ability to communicate
01:41peacefully about political issues that are impacting Australia's democracy, so it would
01:47be hard for any lawmakers to predict where the High Court might draw that line when it
01:51comes to ensuring freedom of political communication whilst balancing public safety and other important rights.
01:59What about a ban on face masks and balaclavas in protests?
02:03Well again, people have a right to be able to express themselves peacefully and to express
02:09their views on matters of public importance and also people have a right to express their
02:14religion in the ways that they dress and it's important that we protect those freedoms and
02:19liberties in our democracy in Australia.
02:22However, we have seen laws be enacted before that limit people's ability to use face coverings
02:29and so again, I guess the question is about proportionality.
02:34If it's unnecessarily impeding police efforts to keep other people safe, that could be an
02:40example of something that requires an intervention to ensure that people can be identified if
02:46they're causing harm or breaching the criminal law in other ways, but this must be done really
02:51delicately because if we get the balance wrong and we stop people from being able to express
02:58themselves peacefully and assemble and participate in democratic discussion that way, we can
03:05create unintended consequences as well, so it's difficult to know where the High Court
03:11would draw the line.
03:13It is fair to say that we have got laws in place that restrict face coverings in other
03:18settings so possibly that might be seen as a legitimate purpose in this context.
03:24What about a ban on glue, ropes and locks?
03:28We've definitely seen laws like that be passed in other jurisdictions in Australia, so all
03:33around the country we've seen parliaments respond to all sorts of different protests
03:38by enacting heavier penalties for people who protest in certain places, who use different
03:44bits of equipment to clamp themselves to bridges, for example, and we've seen that those laws
03:51can be passed.
03:52That's because we don't have a Bill of Rights in our Constitution.
03:56Our Constitution doesn't protect the right to protest.
04:00Instead we've got protections to communicate freely on political matters, so that's where
04:06the limits are when it comes to what the High Court might think.
04:09However, in Victoria you do have the Charter of Rights and Responsibilities, an important
04:14law that protects human rights, including freedom of peaceful assembly, and you also
04:20have laws around religious discrimination as well, so it will be interesting to see
04:26how the Parliament goes about balancing those different public interests when it reviews
04:32any legislation once it's introduced by the government in this area.
04:36And what about this social cohesion pledge for multicultural organisations that they've
04:42got to make before they're going to be able to get access to government grants?
04:47Well again, I think we need to take cautious interest in how this law might interact with
04:55different organisations' ability to speak freely about matters of public policy and
05:00to be able to represent the interests of their communities in peaceful ways.
05:05So it would seem to me that if that discussion, led by community groups, crosses the line
05:12into inciting hatred or crosses the line into encouraging people to act in ways that could
05:17constitute violence or other criminal offences, that might be the type of thing that's seen
05:22as appropriate for the High Court's perspective around laws restricting speech.
05:29However, if it's broader than that and is an attempt to censor or restrict community
05:34groups' ability to debate these issues and represent the interests of different perspectives,
05:41then that might be something that breaches that implied freedom of political communication.
05:46I think in general the community is hungry for leadership from government to address
05:53what's considered to be really unsettling tensions and concerns in the community about
05:59everybody's safety. So it's important that governments listen carefully to what communities
06:05want and listen to people with lived experience from these different perspectives about what
06:12they think will work in terms of keeping people safe and keeping the values that are important
06:18to us in our democracy here in Australia.
06:23For more UN videos visit www.un.org
Comments