A legal challenge has been initiated by the Palestine Action Group against new legislation in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, which critics argue severely restricts protest rights. The Sydney-based activist group is contesting the Crimes Amendment (Places of Worship) Bill 2025 that enables authorities to impose move-on orders for protests near religious sites, widening police powers significantly.
This move by the activist organization follows the enactment of stricter laws passed by the NSW Labor government under Premier Chris Minns. These laws were a reaction to a reported incident involving a caravan filled with explosives and antisemitic materials, identified by police as part of a purported terrorist scheme in Dural, a suburb of Sydney (Sydney Morning Herald).
The legal challenge, filed in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, addresses what the Palestine Action Group and allied organizations describe as “draconian” measures. The group claims the legislation, purportedly aimed at combating hate speech, actually threatens the democratic right to peaceful assembly. The changes to legislation see protestors at places of worship facing potential imprisonment for up to two years.
Critics, including the Human Rights Law Centre of Australia, express concern that these laws could infringe on fundamental rights, such as the right to peaceful assembly and worship (HRLC). As the contentious debate unfolds, it becomes evident that this legal challenge has garnered substantial support from various civil society and trade union organizations, which have joined efforts to contest the statutory provisions in court.
The controversial legislation, part of a broader attempt to address the rising incidents of antisemitism, follows other recent legislative measures, such as the Criminal Code Amendment (Hate Crimes) Bill 2024, which enacts increased penalties for hate-based offenses. These legislative changes have been met with criticism from various quarters who argue that they could stifle legitimate protest and are unconstitutional.
The Palestine Action Group’s legal action underscores a significant debate on balancing security measures with civil liberties, a conversation that will likely have lasting implications beyond the borders of NSW.