The Racial and Religious Vilification Act: Australia’s worst piece of legislation ever?

Danny Nalliah and Daniel Scot, who were previously found to have vilified Muslims under Australia’s stupidest piece of legislation, the anti-free-speech and anti-freedom-of-religion Racial And Religious Vilification Act (Victoria), have had the decision overturned. The Act had been passed in order to promote tolerance, by the ridiculous method of – wait for it – getting religious groups to sue each other. Because, as we all know, nothing promotes peace and brotherhood like a good lawsuit, right?

The way the law was drafted, anyone who is offended potentially has a case. Thus, speaking publicly about another religion in such a way that does not provide good PR for that religion is illegal in Victoria.

This, of course, means that if you do speak unfavourably about another religion and their clerics don’t like it, and you cannot afford a lawyer to defend yourself, either shut up, settle or risk losing everything. Are the claims that you made true? Irrelevant, my friend; truth is not a defence. Could there ever be a law that has a greater chilling effect on free speech than this one?

The law, as it stands, is a perfect weapon for litigious, moneyed religions and cults against smaller, less privileged groups.

Back to the case at hand: it’s not all good news. The case will be re-heard by the original tribunal.

Was the Court of Appeal too afraid of the political consequences to make a proper decision? If the original decision was bad, why not quash it all together? Better still, pass it up to the High Court and quash the entire noxious law!