Australia: PM Albanese cites the Bible while defending hate-speech exemptions in new legislation

Image: Jihad Watch

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has drawn criticism after invoking the Old Testament in a broad and indirect attempt to justify a contentious exemption in the government’s proposed hate speech legislation—an exemption that critics fear could weaken the law’s intent.

At the centre of the debate is a carve-out in the draft legislation that allows the direct quotation or referencing of religious texts when done “for the purpose of religious teaching or discussion.” The Coalition has raised strong objections, arguing that this provision risks undermining the effectiveness of the laws by creating a loophole that could be exploited to legitimise hate speech under the guise of religious instruction.

Concerns have been particularly sharp around the possibility that radical preachers could rely on selective interpretations of Islamic texts, including passages from the Quran and the Hadiths—the recorded sayings and actions of the Prophet Muhammad—to justify or spread hostility toward the Jewish community. Critics warn that, without clear safeguards, the exemption could shield inflammatory rhetoric from legal scrutiny.

When questioned about the rationale behind this religious-text exemption at a press conference on Tuesday, Mr Albanese said the legislation is designed around a “principle-based test” focused on speech and conduct that actively “incites racial hatred.” He emphasised that the bill has been referred to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, underscoring the government’s intention to build broad political and community consensus.

In responding to concerns, the Prime Minister made repeated references to the Old Testament, suggesting that religious scriptures often contain passages that could be considered problematic if taken literally or out of context. “I don’t know if you’ve read the Old Testament, but I refer you to that,” he said, implying that outlawing the quotation of such texts could have far-reaching and unintended consequences.

Pressed further to clarify how the “narrow defence” for quoting religious texts would operate, Mr Albanese reiterated his position. He again pointed to the Old Testament and other religious writings, arguing that a blanket prohibition on quoting sacred texts could create legal and cultural complications. He urged people to consider what might happen if such texts were effectively banned from discussion or teaching.

The Prime Minister stressed that the government had consulted widely, engaging not only with the Jewish community but also with multiple faith groups. According to Mr Albanese, this consultation was aimed at ensuring the legislation commands the widest possible support while avoiding outcomes that could unintentionally restrict legitimate religious expression.

He also highlighted that referring the bill to a parliamentary committee was a deliberate step to allow detailed scrutiny of these sensitive issues. The committee, he said, would examine whether the proposed exemption strikes the right balance between preventing hate speech and protecting freedom of religion.

A leaked version of the draft bill, obtained by News.com.au, sheds light on the specific wording of the exemption. It states that a preacher or religious figure would not be legally liable if their conduct consists solely of directly quoting from, or otherwise referencing, a religious text for the purposes of teaching or discussion. This language has intensified debate over how narrowly or broadly the exemption might be interpreted in practice.

Critics point out that certain passages in some English translations of the Quran, for instance, describe disbelieving Jews, Christians, and polytheists of a particular historical period as “the worst of all beings.” They argue that without clear limits, such passages could be cited to justify hateful messaging while remaining technically within the bounds of the proposed law.

As the bill moves through parliamentary review, the tension between safeguarding religious freedom and preventing the misuse of sacred texts to incite hatred remains a central and unresolved challenge.

(This Article was originally published by Jihad Watch)