The New South Wales (NSW) government recently announced its commitment to amending the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 to prohibit religious vilification. The amendment aims to make it illegal to incite hatred, serious contempt, or severe ridicule towards a person or group of persons based on their religious belief, affiliation, or activity. While this move is seen as a step in the right direction, critics argue that it does not provide enough protection for individuals of faith.
According to NSW Attorney General Michael Daley, the amendment is necessary to ensure that no one has to endure public hate due to their religious beliefs. The government consulted various stakeholder groups, including religious organizations, advocacy groups, legal stakeholders, and government agencies, to develop these proposed amendments. Minister for Multiculturalism Steve Kamper emphasized that this legislation is crucial to protect faith communities from growing levels of intolerance.
However, some activists, such as Michael Andjelkovic, have voiced their dissatisfaction with the amendment. Andjelkovic, a community campaigner, has been advocating for religious protection legislation for over three years. He argues that religious vilification laws do not offer the same level of protection as discrimination laws. For example, he highlights a scenario where a Christian is asked to leave a restaurant simply because the restaurant does not serve Christians. While this discriminatory act may not incite hatred or severe ridicule, it still poses a form of discrimination that vilification laws do not cover. Andjelkovic believes that enacting religious anti-discrimination legislation would provide more comprehensive protection for people of faith.
Ironically, NSW and South Australia are the only two states in Australia without such protections. Andjelkovic has been actively promoting a grassroots movement to gather support for religious anti-discrimination legislation. Despite numerous reviews, investigations, and positive responses from religious leaders and community members, he feels frustrated by the lack of progress. The NSW government has responded to a petition regarding the Anti-Discrimination Act by referring it to the Law Reform Commission for review. Andjelkovic believes this process will take years and that the government has effectively postponed a decision on the matter.
While the amendment has received criticism, there are also groups that support the government’s initiative. The Falun Dafa Association of Australia, a spiritual practice persecuted in China, commends the NSW government for the amendment. However, they suggest that additional protections be added, similar to those in Victoria’s legislation. They emphasize the importance of protecting peaceful meditators who have faced persecution and dehumanization under the Chinese Communist Party’s regime. They hope that their recommendations for harmonizing protections from the Victorian legislation will be included in the NSW bill.
In conclusion, the NSW government’s commitment to prohibiting religious vilification has been met with both praise and criticism. While the amendment is seen as a positive step, activists argue that it falls short of providing adequate protection for individuals of faith. The debate surrounding religious anti-discrimination legislation continues, with some calling for a more comprehensive approach to safeguard religious freedom.
Source link
