Australia has seen a growing push for stronger hate speech laws at both the state and federal level. Supporters argue these laws are necessary to combat extremism, racism and antisemitism. However, Libertarians believe many proposed Australia hate speech laws threaten free speech, undermine freedom of expression and risk criminalising legitimate political discussion.
The Libertarian Party supports strong penalties for violence, threats and genuine criminal conduct. But it opposes vague and expanding speech restrictions that hand governments increasing power over public debate.
In Victoria, the Allan government introduced the Justice Legislation Amendment Anti-vilification and Social Cohesion Act 2024 (Vic) (Anti-vilification Act). Federally, further laws have been proposed through measures such as the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism Bill and the proposed Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism Bill 2026.
Libertarians argue these laws are often presented as targeting extremists. However, in practice, they can easily expand into broader restrictions on political speech and public discussion.
The Importance of Free Speech
Victorian Libertarian leader David Limbrick has repeatedly argued that free speech is essential to a free society.
Quoting abolitionist Frederick Douglass, Limbrick warned:
“Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one’s thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist. That, of all rights, is the dread of tyrants.”
Limbrick criticised the growing trend among major political parties to criminalise speech:
“Now we have the Greens, Labor and the Liberal Party in a downward spiral competing over which speech they want to outlaw and criminalise first.”
The Libertarian Party believes that while hateful ideas should be challenged socially and morally, governments should be extremely cautious about regulating speech through criminal law.
Existing Laws Already Cover Genuine Threats
Australia already has extensive laws covering:
- incitement to violence
- threats
- terrorism
- harassment
- stalking
- intimidation
- hate-motivated violence.
Federal legislation, including the Criminal Code Act 1995, the Crimes Act 1914, the Racial Hatred Act 1995, the Racial Discrimination Act 1975, the Migration Act 1958 and the Intelligence Services Act 2001, already provides broad powers to prosecute serious criminal conduct.
Libertarians argue the focus should remain on actual violence and genuine hate crimes, not subjective interpretations of offensive speech.
Problems With Hate Speech Laws Victoria
The Libertarian Party opposed Victoria’s expanded vilification laws because of concerns about vague definitions and selective enforcement.
Its submission on the Anti-Vilification Act warned that terms such as “serious contempt”, “revulsion” and “severe ridicule” are highly subjective and difficult to define consistently.
The party argued that many proposed restrictions resemble modern blasphemy laws, where unpopular opinions may be punished depending on political or cultural trends.
Libertarians also warned that the laws may have major unintended consequences:
- politically motivated complaints
- selective prosecutions
- chilling effects on public debate
- increased censorship pressure
- expanded state power over speech.
The submission stated, “One person’s genuine public interest is another person’s harmful hate speech.”
Combatting Antisemitism Without Destroying Freedom
The Libertarian Party strongly condemns antisemitism and violence against the Jewish community.
Events following the October 7 attacks, protests near Bondi Beach, rising tensions around the Gaza conflict, and the aftermath of the Bondi terror attack have understandably increased public concern about extremism and social division.
However, Libertarians argue that protecting social cohesion does not require governments to aggressively police speech.
The party warns that poorly drafted hate speech laws in Australia may end up criminalising controversial political discussion rather than stopping violent extremists or genuine hate organisations.
Recent debates over slogans, protest chants and online commentary demonstrate how difficult it can be to distinguish between:
- offensive speech
- political speech
- satire
- protest
- genuine incitement.
Libertarians argue that governments should not become arbiters of acceptable political opinion.
International Warnings
The Libertarian Party submission[i] opposing the proposed changes to anti-vilifications law in Victoria (dated 11 October 2024) examined international examples from:
- Scotland
- Ireland
- Canada
- New Zealand
- the United States.
In several countries, proposed hate speech laws were delayed, abandoned or heavily criticised due to concerns about overreach and censorship.
The submission also noted examples where prosecutions amplified extremist behaviour rather than suppressing it.
Libertarians warn that, rather than reducing harmful behaviour, censorship often creates:
- “martyrs”
- greater publicity
- underground radicalisation
- distrust in institutions.
The Risk to Freedom of Expression
Australia does not have a US-style First Amendment protecting unrestricted speech.
Instead, protections rely on a mix of:
- Constitutional law
- implied political communication freedoms
- common law principles
- court interpretation.
This makes Australians more vulnerable to expanding censorship laws.
Libertarians argue that broad Australia hate speech laws risk damaging:
- democratic debate
- political dissent
- artistic expression
- comedy
- religious discussion
- online commentary.
The rise of social media and digital communication also creates pressure for governments to regulate speech occurring across borders and on global platforms.
The Libertarian Party warned that Victoria’s proposed laws attempting to regulate online speech posted outside the state reveal both the difficulty and futility of such regulation.
The Libertarian Alternative
The Libertarian Party believes the best response to bad ideas is:
- open debate
- counter-speech
- public criticism
- strong policing of actual violence
- equal treatment under the law.
Libertarians support laws against violence, threats and terrorism. But they oppose expanding government powers to police speech, opinions and political expression.
As Victorian Libertarian leader David Limbrick warned, “Hate speech laws are a sword without a hilt. They cannot be wielded safely, and they will hurt everyone.”
The Libertarian position is that a free society requires robust discussion, even when opinions are offensive, controversial or unpopular. Once governments gain the power to decide what speech is acceptable, every Australian’s freedom of expression is at risk.
[i] https://www.vic.libertarians.org.au/anti_vilification_submission