Labor’s hate speech bill a risk to religious speech, faith leaders

Faith leaders have warned Labor’s hate crimes legislation will limit religious speech, if provisions outlawing the incitement of ‘force or violence’ against protected groups are interpreted to include psychological harm

Anglican bishop Michael Stead. Picture: John Feder

You can now listen to The Australian's articles. Give us your feedback.

You can now listen to The Australian's articles.

Faith leaders have warned Labor’s hate crimes bill, and a new amendment proposed by teal MP Allegra Spender, will limit religious speech, if provisions outlawing the incitement of “force or violence” against protected groups include psychological harm.

Anglican Bishop of South Sydney Michael Stead wrote to Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus on Tuesday, when the bill was debated in parliament, urging him to consider the “potential challenge that vilification law poses to religious freedom”.

Dr Stead, who is backed by other Christian groups and the imams council, raised concerns that traditional religious teachings on sex and gender could be considered a threat of violence or force causing harm, and could be captured by the bill.

After Ms Spender revealed she would table her own amendment to the hate speech bill that would outline a “serious vilification” offence, Dr Stead cautioned the proposed changes could mean the legislation captures acts that promote “ill-will” and “(stir) up feelings”.

Dr Stead said he had raised concerns the bill would criminalise religious teachings during a Senate inquiry into the legislation, with the Attorney-General’s Department responding that “force or violence” was not intended to capture mental harm. But Dr Stead said there was no certainty this position would be “adopted by a court interpreting the provisions”.

“First, the AGD’s view is contestable according to the terms of the Criminal Code itself,” he said in the letter. “The Macquarie Dictionary definitions of both ‘force’ and ‘violence’ do, as the AGD states, ‘refer to physical coercion, exertion of strength or use of rough force’.

“However, many of the limbs within those definitions are capable of extending to matters beyond physical force or violence.

“While certain of the limbs are directed exclusively to violence, many others are not.”

The Australian National Imams Council has also thrown its support behind Dr Stead’s push for clarity on the impact on religious speech given the extent of Ms Spender’s amendments.

With Jewish leaders and LGBTIQA+ advocates backing her amendments, Ms Spender said on Tuesday the changes she was proposing were “guardrails” that were balanced with concerns about free speech.

Her amendment will criminalise “promoting hatred” through an act committed with the intention of “harassing, threatening, intimidating or abusing” a targeted person or group. Under the provision, hatred includes “detestation, enmity, ill-will, revulsion, serious contempt and malevolence”.

The bill in its current form will create new offences for “threatening force or violence against targeted groups and members of groups”.