The NSWCCL strongly opposes all forms of hate directed towards vulnerable groups. The NSWCCL is also concerned about the weaponisation of hatred directed towards vulnerable groups as a political tool to pass legislation which unduly restricts civil liberties. Responding to hate in the community must be evidence-based and carefully considered with reference to other fundamental freedoms that are owed to individuals.

The NSW Council for Civil Liberties (NSWCCL) welcomed the opportunity to make a submission to the Justice and Communities Committee in regard to the inquiry into Antisemitism in NSW. Our organisation is proudly non-sectarian, but within our managing committee there are Jewish, Muslim, Palestinian and Christian people, along with atheists. Our members share a deep commitment to the elimination of all forms of racism, including antisemitism. We believe that responding to antisemitism in our community must be evidence-based, which means it cannot be responded to in isolation of other forms of discrimination.

The NSWCCL is concerned that antisemitism has been weaponised by politicians and the media particularly over the past year. This is done through the incorrect and harmful conflation of Zionism and Judaism. While Judaism is a religion and an ethnicity, Zionism is a modern political movement to establish a Jewish homeland in Israel. Conflating legitimate criticism of Israel with antisemitism at a time when Israel is justifiably being criticised for failing to meet international human rights standards by
the International Court of Justice is dangerous. This not only stifles legitimate political discourse about foreign affairs but also treats Jewish people as having monolithic political beliefs, a view that is itself antisemitic.

The New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties wrote to the chair of Universities Australia to express their concerns regarding the new definition of antisemitism adopted by Universities Australia. The new definition conflates legitimate criticism of the State of Israel with antisemitism, posing serious risks to freedom of expression and academic freedom.

You can read the letter here or find our media release here

The NSWCCL has highlighted the urgent need for a comprehensive regulatory framework to govern the use of AI by public sector entities in Australia. While AI offers significant benefits in improving efficiency and service delivery to the public, it also poses risks to privacy, fairness, transparency, and accountability. NSWCCL’s recommendations aim to achieve a balance of innovation with the protection of individual rights and the promotion of public trust.

We strongly assert that the decision to allow only seven working days for public submissions on such a critical and complex piece of legislation is incompatible with the principles of transparent governance.  This extremely short process will exclude many voices and undermines the democratic principles of participation and inclusion.

The NSWCCL supports increased regulatory powers for holding digital platforms accountable and transparent, and agrees with the Bill's overall intent, however, we stand with our civil society colleagues in recommending amendments to improve public transparency and to amend the industry code-making process to give the regulator the power to set industry standards.

The NSW Council of Civil Liberties and Scarlet Alliance, Australian Sex Workers Association submits that the Criminal Code Amendment (Deepfake Sexual Material) Bill 2024 fails to enhance the civil rights of the Australian public. Generative AI is an increasingly fast moving and adaptive technology. Any response to address the harm that can be caused through the abuse of this technology must be built on a holistic government approach, and not simply through increased criminal measures. Even where new criminal measures are enacted these must add to, and not cut across or confuse, the existing protection and legislative frameworks which already exist at federal, state and territory levels.

The advent of social media has had wide-ranging ramifications for Australian society. NSWCCL is particularly concerned about the corrosive effects that some social media content can have on the civil liberties that the Australian people deserve. Troublingly, this is a phenomenon which – due to its rapid development – is currently outpacing regulators. 

The default principle is that all Australians should have access to a wide array of information and ideas without restrictions unless there is good reason to limit this access. Not only is this principle an essential aspect of freedom of expression, it is also at the heart of Australia’s democratic ideal, in which people have access to the information and ideas that inform their vote. 

The right to protest comes from the implied freedom of political communication found in the Australian Constitution. It means while Australians may not explicitly have a right to protest, governments are expressly forbidden from introducing any laws which might impede a person's right to express themselves or protest. Despite this, the NSW government (alongside state governments in other jurisdictions) has introduced some of the most draconian anti-protest legislation in Australia which is accompanied by a stigmatising narrative of fear and security risk against protestors.

The NSWCCL submits that in New South Wales, section 144G of the Roads Act 1993 (NSW) (‘Roads Act’) and section 214A of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) (‘Crimes Act’) significantly infringe people’s rights to freedom of movement, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of political communication, and ought to be repealed. These restrictive and repressive laws create an environment where stigmatising narratives flourish in sections of politics, media and law enforcement in Australia. There's a prevalent narrative enabled by these laws emphasising security threats and perceptions of disruption associated with public protests.

We think these terrible laws should be repealed. The right to protest is a fundamental democratic right that allows us to express our views, shape our societies, and press for social change. In NSW, and nationally across Australia, it is under attack.

In April 2022, the NSW Parliament passed legislation to prevent “illegal protesting” on major roads, bridges, tunnels, public transport, and infrastructure facilities. The legislation amends section 144G the Roads Act 1993 which criminalises causing serious disruption by entering, remaining on or trespassing on prescribed major bridges and tunnels, to now include all “main roads”. Offences carry a maximum penalty of $22,000 or two years in gaol, or both.

The NSW Council of Civil Liberties submits that the proliferation Artificial Intelligence (AI) poses significant risks to the civil rights of the Australian public, despite providing many new social and economic opportunities. As it stands, Australia’s regulatory system fails to fully address and balance these risks against the wealth of opportunities – an issue that will grow with increased use of these technologies.

Our submission responds to two issues arising out of the Terms of Reference presented by the Select Committee on Adopting AI: (e) opportunities to foster a responsible AI industry in Australia; and (f) potential threats to democracy in institutions from generative AI.