8legs: Bondi, australia

Your Followed Topics

#1 out of 2

The piece warns that past Australian bans on political groups were struck down by high court and harmed civil liberties.
Twomey argues banning organisations is historically risky and could be abused without due process.
The article recounts wartime bans, including the Industrial Workers of the World and the Communist Party, showing how power was used selectively.
The author notes the 1950 Communist Party Dissolution Act was struck down as unconstitutional.
The piece highlights procedural fairness concerns in ministerial declarations of hate groups.
The essay questions whether current hate laws align with historical limits of executive power.
Twomey emphasizes the risk that laws could be used to suppress civil rights without clear verdicts of guilt.
Historical bans often targeted broader groups beyond those convicted of crimes.
The article frames the debate as balancing national security against civil liberties.
The author cautions Australians to consider constitutional limits before enacting new hate-group bans.

Vote 0

#2 out of 22.2K est. views

Australia introduces draft laws to criminalize racial hatred and list hate groups amid the Bondi attack response.
Offenders could face up to five years for inciting racial hatred and up to 15 years for directing hate-group activities.
Public submissions on the draft are due soon, with concerns the process is rushed and public consultation is inadequate.
The legislation could expand protections beyond race to religion, sexuality, and disability after the initial enactment.
Experts warn past counter-terrorism laws were rushed through Parliament with limited rights review.
Analysts say current proposals should consider protections for all groups experiencing hate crime and avoid overreach.
Key targets mentioned include the National Socialist Network and Hizb ut-Tahrir as potential hate groups.
Authorities emphasize the laws aim to counter terrorism and hate while balancing civil liberties.
The draft bill is 144 pages long and contains wide-ranging amendments to criminal law, migration rules, and more.
Public debate centers on whether the measures effectively address hate and violence without eroding rights.

Vote 0

Unlimited Access

Personalized Feed

Full Experience

By continuing, you agree to the Privacy Policy.. You also agree to receive our newsletters, you can opt-out any time.

Create an account and enjoy content that interests you with your personalized feed

Unlimited Access

Personalized Feed

Full Experience

By continuing, you agree to the Privacy Policy.. You also agree to receive our newsletters, you can opt-out any time.