Banning protests because they cost money to police is a bridge too far in a liberal democracy

The decision by Premier Chris Minns to order a review of the handling of pro-Palestinian demonstrations and vigils in Sydney raises some alarming questions about the right to protest in NSW.

After 52 consecutive weeks of protests every Sunday, interest in the Middle East rallies is waning in the wider community. The Herald’s Resolve Political Monitor poll published this week found Australians strongly rejected the use of public protests to take sides in the escalating war: 59 per cent of voters oppose the marches and only 8 per cent want authorities to allow protests supporting Palestine; 7 per cent favoured pro-Israel protests.

Pro-Palestinian demonstrators rally in Sydney on Sunday.Credit: AP

But for a nation that prides itself on freedom of speech and association, and has welcomed millions with diverse beliefs and religions to build a better country, the idea that a state government is contemplating blocking a protest because policing it is too expensive is surely a bridge too far.

Minns has performed extraordinarily well over recent weeks in handling tensions in the community. He has been a leader. Now, regrettably, he has emerged from the long weekend’s Middle East remembrances and vigils to order the review, arguing policing of continual pro-Palestinian protests had chewed through at least $5 million in resources. He said police and taxpayers were entitled to be concerned, and the money could be better spent addressing domestic violence, knife crime or roadside drug and alcohol testing.

The answer, the premier said, may be allowing the burden of protests on police resources to be a valid reason to be presented to the Supreme Court to block a demonstration.

Last week, Minns and the Herald were strongly supportive of a police bid to prevent two rallies in Sydney to coincide with the anniversary of the October 7 massacre in Israel. The Herald was persuaded that the risk of violence was too great to allow the protest to proceed as planned.

But on Thursday police withdrew their court action and gave the green light for the Sunday protest after securing the promise of an amended route, and a stationary vigil on the Monday. In the event, there was a heavy police presence, including officers on their day off at Sunday’s protest, where about 10,000 people congregated in Sydney’s Hyde Park.

Clearly people have grown tired of the protests, but there are broader principles at stake in terms of what Minns is contemplating. As Herald columnist and former federal attorney-general George Brandis wrote this week, the right to peaceful protest has long been recognised as an ancient right of all citizens at common law, and our political leaders must not let distaste for the protesters’ cause – or disgust at the timing of marches – overcome a commitment to the rights that all citizens enjoy, in a liberal democracy, to speak freely and to associate peacefully.

One-off arrangements over safety issues are tenable, but extending the regime to stop protests because they cost money to police is a massive overstep.

Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.