Latest News

Victoria’s Multifaith Advisory Group (MAG) consists of leaders from a diverse range of faith traditions. This document represents a joint submission of the undersigned MAG members in response to the proposed amendments to section 18 of the Racial Discrimination Act (Cth).

The MAG considers that the current Racial Discrimination Act (the Act) appropriately balances freedom of speech and protection against racial discrimination. As such, the MAG does not support the proposed amendments to the legislation.

However, religious discrimination and vilification is unfortunately a common experience of many in the faith communities and it is the MAG’s strong recommendation that the Act also expressly prohibits discriminatory conduct towards people on the basis of their religious beliefs.

With regard to the changes proposed under the Freedom of Speech (Repeal of S. 18C) Bill 2014, the MAG’s key concerns are outlined below.

Subsection 1 (b)
On the basis of the discussion above, the MAG recommends that acts done because of religion or religious belief be prohibited, along with the existing grounds of race, colour, nationality and ethnicity.

Subsection 2
We welcome the addition of vilification in the Bill, however we consider both intimidation and vilification as being too narrowly defined.

Intimidation in the form of derogatory or demeaning comments can affect an individual’s mental and emotional health, reducing their sense of self-worth and ability to participate in society socially, economically and politically. Consider the tragic impact of cyber bullying on some of our young people to understand that intimidation is not just the threat of physical harm.

Vilification includes more than inciting hatred against a person or group of persons. We recommend a broader definition more aligned with Victoria’s Racial and Religious Tolerance Act (2001) which includes “…serious contempt for, or revulsion or severe ridicule of …”

We also support the retention of the words ‘insult, offend and humiliate’ as there is a significant amount of racial and religious discrimination that takes place that is serious and causes real emotional and psychological harm to its victims that does not fit within the acts of vilification or intimidation.

Subsection 3
We do not oppose the inclusion of a “reasonableness test” in the Bill, however we are concerned by its current wording: “…to be determined by the standards of an ordinary reasonable member of the Australian community, not by the standards of any particular group within the Australia community”.

Our rich diversity means there are many different ethnicities, religions, value systems and world views present and interacting within Australia. We find the inclusion of the words ‘not by the standards of any particular group’, in contrast to the ‘standards of an ordinary, reasonable member of the Australian community’, suggests that the ‘ordinary, reasonable’ Australian is not a member of ‘any particular group’ and this is a misrepresentation of the fabric of Australia’s society. If the test is intended to represent the standards only of Australians not part of ‘any particular group’ then those standards will be unrepresentative of many Australians.

We recommend the removal of the words “not by the standards of any particular group within the Australian community” and this will better reflect the diversity that exists in the Australian community.

Subsection 4
We consider the proposed exemption to be too broad in its reach, to the extent that it undermines the intent of the Act. The removal of any requirement that the conduct be undertaken reasonably and in good faith or that it be fair or accurate may allow for brazenly malicious, misleading and untruthful conduct. We consider the current exemption provision in the Act to be appropriate. It exempts conduct done reasonably and in good faith if it is in the public interest in the course of a range of important public discussions.

Conclusion
In summary, the Act in its current form has neither been abused by vexatious litigants, nor curtailed freedom of speech in any substantive manner. However, the proposed changes will weaken the Act in ways which effectively render it redundant.

Australia is a global success story with people of many different religious, ethnic and cultural backgrounds living together in peace and prosperity. However, this success has been built upon the long-term commitment and investment of successive Commonwealth and State Governments. We believe the proposed amendments to the Act represent a step back from this commitment, and if passed into law may have negative consequences for peace, harmony and prosperity in the longer term.

Further Information:

• Murray Davies, Chair, Faith Communities Council of Victoria
  e: chair@faithvictoria.org.au m: 0419 180 799
  
  
• Gary Bouma, UNESCO Chair in Interreligious and Intercultural Relations - Asia Pacific region
  e: gary.bouma@monash.edu t: (03) 9903 4587

Endorsed by:

• Bishop Philip Huggins, Anglican Bishop of the NW Region, Diocese of Melbourne.
• Buddhist Council of Victoria
• Faith Communities Council of Victoria (FCCV)
• Gary Bouma, UNESCO Chair in Interreligious and Intercultural Relations – Asia Pacific region
• Hindu Foundation
• Interfaith Centre of Melbourne
• Islamic Council of Victoria
• Jewish Communities Council of Victoria
• Lutheran Church of Australia, Victoria District
• Rabbinical Council of Victoria
• Sikh Interfaith Council
• Uniting Church in Australian, Synod of Victoria and Tasmania
• Victorian Baha’i Community
• Victorian Council of Churches