Muslim group slams ministry over lack of time given for hate speech feedback
Thursday, 5 August 2021
A Muslim group says it's “disheartening” and “insensitive” that it was not given enough time to make a submission on proposed changes to hate speech legislation.
The Government announced proposed changes to the Human Rights Act 1993 and a new criminal offence under the Crimes Act 1961 on June 25 and called for submissions until August 6.
Under the proposal, protection from hateful speech would be provided to a wider group of people, including those holding religious beliefs and people of all sexual orientations.
The changes would make it an offence to incite hatred on the basis of sex, martial status, religious belief, ethical belief (meaning the lack of a religious belief), colour, race, ethnic or national origins, disability, age, political opinion, employment status, family status, or sexual orientation.
**READ MORE:
* Diversity is our strength – but only when we foster a culture of acceptance and inclusion
* Hate speech to become Crimes Act offence with harsher penalities under Government proposal
**
A significant boost to the maximum sentence for the offence was also proposed, rising from three months to three years’ imprisonment.
In a provisional submission, the Federation of Islamic Associations of New Zealand (FIANZ) said a “dysfunctional process of engagement” meant there was “insufficient time to make any truly meaningful response” to the proposals.
President Ibrar Sheikh said the Christchurch terror attack on March 15, 2019, was “a seminal lesson on the impact of unabated hate” but legislation would not alone protect against those who were “determined to subject others to misery through hate”.
The proposed legislation was “a step towards ensuring the safety of all people” but the rushed process had made consultation difficult.
The Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Christchurch mosque terror attacks recommended law changes to strengthen protection against hate speech.
The inquiry found there had only been one prosecution for “intent to incite hostility” under the existing law, and two civil claims.
Muslim organisations had raised the problem of hate speech with the Government since 2015, Fianz chairman Abdur Razzaq said.
“[We've] waited over six years for some action, and yet the Ministry [of Justice] did not have the courtesy of allocating an extra 10 working days’ extension.”
There was a global trend of Muslims bearing the brunt of hate crime, and the Christchurch terror attack demonstrated the tragic consequences of hate mongering, Fianz's submission said.
Fianz called for more clarity from the Government about the proposed changes, including examples of what was considered hate speech, and the threshold for criminal liability.
“The absence of this makes this exercise of consultation quite meaningless and open to confusion.”
A lack of specific wording was the most significant limitation for consultation, the group said.
A proposed increase in the maximum penalty for breaking the law was “consistent with comparable offences” but “punitive measures need to be balanced with proactive education and remedial programmes”, the submission said.
Fianz would provide a definitive response to the proposed changes when the Government confirmed the wording, it said.
A submission by the Christchurch City Council supported proposals to strengthen provisions to protect communities from “direct, indirect and incited hatred and discrimination” but noted the important role of prevention.
“Greater investment in social cohesion and addressing inequality, alongside deterrents, will have a greater impact in preventing incitement towards hatred and discrimination than a focus on prosecution,” it said.