When 60 neo-Nazis lined the front gates of NSW parliament last week, the premier’s response was swift and familiar.<\/p>\n
As questions and public outrage began mounting over how the rally proceeded under police watch, Chris Minns used his first press conference to soft launch more protest laws.<\/p>\n
“It’s likely the case that we need to give the police more legislated powers to stop this kind of naked hatred and racism on Sydney’s streets,” he told reporters.<\/p>\n
In the days that followed, the premier doubled down, confirming plans to reintroduce amended\u00a0controversial police powers that were struck down by the NSW Supreme Court last month.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
An estimated 60 people from the National Socialist Network attended a rally outside NSW parliament house last weekend. (Facebook: Parliament of NSW)<\/p>\n
It is the latest chapter in a long-running pattern of successive NSW governments steadily tightening the state’s protest laws in response to flashpoint events.<\/p>\n
Legal academics and civil libertarians fear the cumulative effect is eroding one of democracy’s core freedoms in the state \u2014 the right to dissent.<\/p>\n
Warnings ignored<\/p>\n
ASIO director-general Mike Burgess earlier this month warned about the neo-Nazi group behind Saturday’s rally, citing their “hateful, divisive rhetoric and increasingly violent propaganda”.<\/p>\n
Despite those warnings, the rally went ahead, authorised by police.<\/p>\n
Both Mr Minns and NSW Police Commissioner Mal Lanyon said they knew nothing about the rally beforehand, blaming a communication breakdown.<\/p>\n
Deliberately and publicly inciting racial hatred was made a criminal offence in August\u00a0after the government expanded 93ZA in the Crimes Act.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Chris Minns and Mal Lanyon blamed a communication breakdown within the police force. (ABC News: Ruby Ritchie, Liam Patrick)<\/p>\n
The legislation was rushed through parliament after the Dural caravan hoax in January and has since been subject to a parliamentary inquiry.<\/p>\n
Police did not reveal until March 7 that the caravan found full of explosives was not a terrorist plot but a “con job” which had been fabricated by organised criminals.<\/p>\n
The new hate speech laws were not used during the neo-Nazi rally on Saturday and police said they were reviewing whether any offences occurred.<\/p>\n
Police said legal advice suggested blocking the rally was unlikely to succeed in court.<\/p>\n
NSW Council of Civil Liberties president Timothy Roberts said police should have attempted to challenge the rally.<\/p>\n
“They completely waved it through, so not only do I believe that they could have challenged it, they were aware of the illegality of the protest,” Mr Roberts said.<\/p>\n
“Why did neo-Nazis get special treatment here?”<\/p>\n
Timothy Roberts believes police should have attempted to challenge the neo-Nazi rally. (ABC: Nick Dole)<\/p>\n
The ‘erosion’ of protest rights in NSW<\/p>\n
NSW has some of the “most restrictive anti-protest laws” in the country, according to the Human Rights Law Centre’s senior lawyer David Mejia-Canales.<\/p>\n
Over the past decade, successive governments have continued to expand police powers and criminal penalties.<\/p>\n
In 2016, the Baird government introduced move-on powers near mining sites after coal seam gas protests.<\/p>\n
In 2022, the Perrottet government made it an offence to block major roads and entry to important facilities after blockades at Port Botany.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
One such blockade at Port Botany involved an activist suspending themself over the side of a freight bridge, blocking access to incoming and outgoing trains. (Supplied: Facebook)<\/p>\n
This year, the Minns government created move-on powers for protests near places of worship \u2014 the powers the Supreme Court later ruled unconstitutional.<\/p>\n
Mr Roberts said the intention to reintroduce the amended bill would again overstep legal boundaries.<\/p>\n
“Minns is proposing, not only overly zealous laws that are eroding our civil liberties, ones that have already been proven to be constitutionally invalid,” Mr Roberts said.<\/p>\n
“You don’t solve the Nazi problem with laws that erode our civil liberties. You don’t get us closer to social cohesion by arresting people.”<\/p>\n
NSW Attorney-General Michael Daley told parliament the government was acting quickly and makes “no apology for reintroducing strong laws to protect the community”.<\/p>\n
“The amendments in the bill balance community protections with the freedom of political expression,” he said.<\/p>\n
The premier said the government was exploring including Nazi behaviour and speech alongside Nazi symbols in hate speech laws “to ensure that there’s no ambiguity” about this behaviour in NSW.<\/p>\n
“The attorney will soon outline fresh legislation that will allow police to move on groups, harassing, blocking, intimidating people from entering a place of worship,” Mr Minns told Question Time this week.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Professor McNamara spoke of a long history of move-on powers being used against certain groups by police at protests. (ABC News: Patrick Thomas)<\/p>\n
While details of the proposed new laws remain unclear, police argue move-on powers are intended to maintain order.<\/p>\n
Luke McNamara from the Faculty of Law and Justice at UNSW said the powers instead granted broad discretion with little oversight.<\/p>\n
“There’s a long history of move-on powers being used against young people, against Aboriginal people in ways that are problematic, and some research has shown that that is uneven in its impacts,” Professor McNamara said.<\/p>\n
Debate lingers around laws<\/p>\n
The NSW Shadow Attorney-General Alister Henskens argued the Minns government was not going far enough in its protest laws.<\/p>\n
Mr Henskens said while the authorisation process for protests had tended to focus on public safety, more guidance was needed as to what considerations the courts or police commissioner should examine beforehand.<\/p>\n
“We think that our law enforcement and court process should be given some more tools to promote social harmony rather than just allowing hatred to be flourishing in our streets in the guise of exercising freedom of speech,” he said.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Alister Henskens argued the Minns government should go even further with its protest laws. (AAP: Dan Himbrechts)<\/p>\n
Professor McNamara said the current Form 1 system \u2014 also known as Part 4 of the Summary Offences Act \u2014 was originally designed in 1979 to facilitate and embrace the right to protest, not restrict it.<\/p>\n
He said successive governments have made incremental changes “in haste”, ultimately undermining its intent.<\/p>\n
“They’ve been made under pressure cooker environment circumstances. They are not good conditions for making criminal laws or police powers laws,” he said.<\/p>\n
Mr Roberts said the system was becoming increasingly unfit for purpose and needs a redesign.<\/p>\n
“[The Minns government is] inflaming an atmosphere of contempt for protest, for disregarding what it is such an important part of our democratic society,” he said.<\/p>\n
The impact on protesters<\/p>\n