Six years ago, in the heart of this nation, a proclamation was made. Over 250 delegates representing First Nations joined to deliver the Uluru Statement from the Heart, inviting Australians to enshrine an Indigenous Voice within the constitution and to advance truth telling and treaty making.

We are mere weeks until the referendum day on the 14th October when Australians will vote on whether to enshrine a Voice in the Constitution. I take this moment to reiterate our support for a First Nations Voice to Parliament. We strive, in this moment, to be the best allies we can. I note that the discourse surrounding the referendum campaign has reified intergenerational trauma and unearthed historic injustices and the Voice is only one vehicle through which First Nations’ justice may be achieved in Australia.

Human rights and civil liberties groups, including NSW Council for Civil Liberties, have expressed serious doubts about Labor’s move to minimise misinformation, claiming its proposed law threatens free speech and democratic rights.

The rights groups join a growing coalition of voices criticising the Albanese government’s bid to give the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) powers to penalise groups like Meta if they fail to remove misinformation and disinformation.

NSW and Queensland’s peak civil liberties bodies have both revealed their opposition to sections of Labor’s draft bill, arguing it gives the government body too much power to police speech.

Australia remains the only liberal democracy globally without rights protections enshrined in federal law. Indeed, until not so long ago, no bill of rights or Human Rights Act (HRA) existed at any level of government: that was until the often-pioneering ACT Legislative Assembly passed one in 2002.

And while the stalemate has continued at the federal level, other states have followed the ACT’s lead, with Victoria enacting a charter of rights in 2004 and Queensland passing its Human Rights Act in 2019, which still leaves the people of NSW unprotected at all levels.

But this looks likely to change, as members of the 40-odd NSW legal and civil society organisations, including NSW Council for Civil Liberties, running the Human Rights Act for NSW campaign (HRA4NSW) hosted a recent event that saw the NSW attorney general Michael Daley confirm he is open to enacting one.

Opponents of gay conversion practices may need to be careful of critising the institutions that promote it due to the new anti-discrimination laws that passed in New South Wales parliament on Thursday, legal experts have said.

The Minns government’s religious vilification bill, with backing from the opposition, amended the existing Anti-Discrimination Act to make it unlawful to vilify people or organisations on the grounds of their religion.

Alastair Lawrie, an expert in anti-discrimination law at the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, said that “It would be disappointing if this bill passes in its current form,” ahead of the bill being passed. Lawrie expressed that the changes being made were too broad and could lead to restrictions in freedom of speech. 

Legislation making it illegal to publicly ridicule someone due to their religious beliefs has passed NSW Parliament.

The amendment to the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 makes it unlawful to "by a public act, incite hatred towards, serious contempt for, or severe ridicule of, a person or group of persons, because of their religious belief, affiliation or activity".

Civil Liberties Council president Josh Pallas expressed concern at the time it could become illegal to criticise religious institutions such as the Catholic Church, Hillsong or the Church of Scientology as it could be seen as vilifying individual followers.

For more information, read the full article. 

Queer activist groups and human rights organisations have come out in opposition to the proposed NSW religious vilification bill, citing its failure to adequately protect LGBTQI communities.

The bill amends the Anti-Discrimination Act to make it “unlawful to, by a public act, incite hatred towards, serious contempt for, or severe ridicule of, a person or group of persons, because of their religious belief, affiliation or activity.”

In a statement, President of NSW Council for Civil Liberties (NSWCCL) Josh Pallas called on the Bill to either “address all discrimination now” or be withdrawn until the review of the Anti-Discrimination Act by the NSW Law Reform Commission is complete.

Activist are planning to gather at the Sydney Town Hall from 1pm on Saturday, 5 August to protest proposed changes to the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act that would see “religious vilification” become a criminal offense.\

There is concern that the definition of “religious vilification” in the bill is too vague and that it could be used to protect hate speech against LGBTIQA+ people or practices like conversion therapy.

There is also concern that the proposed bill could further entrench religious exemptions in NSW’s anti-discrimination laws that allow religious groups and businesses they own to legally discriminate against people on the grounds of their sexual orientation, gender identity or relationship status.

A national digital identity is being prepared for all Australians for use at the end of next year which poses one of the biggest changes to Australia in its recent history and yet most people seem unaware, unconcerned, overwhelmed or distracted, Umbrella News' Sebastian Salt reports. 

This bill presents to the public claims to safety and convenience, while human rights and civil liberties groups are saying that the new digital identity system will have a catastrophic impact upon our basic freedoms.

NSW Council for Civil Liberties Assistant Secretary, Michelle Falstein, made comments to Umbrella News, saying that the system suffers from an unacceptable lack of enforceable definition.

Leading up to International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia, the media was campaigning for councils to cancel drag story time events in response to threats from right-wing groups.

Rainbow Community Angel Flis Marlowe stated that, “These people were calling library staff ‘groomers’ and ‘pedophiles’. It was horrendous. Ten councils cancelled their drag story-telling shows. When the Lethem Library, sadly, had to cancel theirs, we were prepared. We met the librarians; we visited the library and we worked with Frock Hudson, the drag performer scheduled to read on the day.”