New South Wales Premier Chris Minns may not ban the slogan 'globalise the intifada' pending a constitutional challenge outcome in Queensland. He initially intended to prohibit it due to concerns over violent rhetoric but has delayed legislation until February.
Key points
Chris Minns may not ban 'globalise the intifada' yet
Legislation is pending until February 2026
Inquiry recommended a ban linked to incitement
Queensland has already banned similar slogans
Pro-Palestine groups plan legal challenges in Queensland
Mentioned in this story
Chris MinnsQueensland Government
The New South Wales premier, Chris Minns, has said he will only ban the slogan “globalise the intifada” if a potential constitutional challenge to a similar ban in Queensland is unsuccessful, the strongest indication yet that the state government may not seek to proscribe the contested phrase at all.
Minns was unequivocal about his intention to ban what he described as “hateful, violent rhetoric” following the Bondi terror attack in December, but sent the issue to a parliamentary inquiry, which he said would enable legislation to be introduced when parliament returned in February.
Despite the inquiry recommending the phrase be banned when it is linked to “incitement of hatred, or harassment, intimidation or violence”, that legislation has yet to materialise. Meanwhile, Queensland has gone ahead with its own ban, also capturing the phrase “from the river to the sea”, which has seen dozens of arrests and pro-Palestine groups vow to launch a legal challenge.
In an interview with 2GB on Tuesday, the premier explicitly linked the fate of NSW legislation to the outcome of that challenge.
“If [the ban] is upheld in Queensland, I’ll do it in New South Wales, I won’t muck around,” he said.
“It looks fantastic for me, perhaps, if I move a piece of legislation in the initial instance, but in three months’ time, if it’s knocked over in the courts, I’ve looked through this via bitter experience and realised we’re in a worse position than where we were.”
It was another step back from Minns, who told a press conference in March that while he was “grateful” another jurisdiction had gone ahead, a ban was “coming in soon” irrespective of how things played out in Queensland. He said he would fight a constitutional challenge in NSW.
But following a successful challenge in April to the another element of his post-Bondi legislative agenda – controversial anti-protests laws – his office confirmed he was now looking to the neighbouring state.
Q&A
What is the current status of the ban on 'globalise the intifada' in New South Wales?
The ban on 'globalise the intifada' in New South Wales is uncertain as Premier Chris Minns awaits the outcome of a constitutional challenge in Queensland before proceeding.
Why did Chris Minns consider banning the slogan 'globalise the intifada'?
Chris Minns considered banning the slogan due to its association with 'hateful, violent rhetoric' following a terror attack in Bondi.
What recommendations did the parliamentary inquiry make regarding the slogan?
The parliamentary inquiry recommended banning the slogan when linked to incitement of hatred, harassment, intimidation, or violence, but legislation has not yet been introduced.
What actions have been taken in Queensland regarding similar slogans?
Queensland has implemented a ban on the slogan 'globalise the intifada' and the phrase 'from the river to the sea', resulting in numerous arrests and a planned legal challenge by pro-Palestine groups.
Trump reviews Iranian proposal aimed at reopening Strait of Hormuz
President Trump is reviewing an Iranian proposal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and delay nuclear negotiations. However, he is reportedly dissatisfied with the plan as it postpones discussions on Iran's nuclear activities.
See every story in News — including breaking news and analysis.
The premier’s comments on Tuesday appear to be an even further retreat.
The NSW court of appeal’s recent ruling that the anti-protest laws impermissibly burdened the right to political communication seems to have made the difference, the second challenge Minns has lost after the court struck down laws prohibiting protests outside places of worship in October.
The controversy around the inquiry into banning “globalise the intifada” cannot have helped.
It was only open to submissions for three weeks, and did not hold public hearings, because of the “urgent need” to introduce legislation, leading to accusations it was “rushed over the holiday season”.
Submissions from Jewish groups including the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies and the Executive Council of Australian Jewry called for a ban on phrases which include “intifada”, from the Arabic for uprising or “shaking off”, and used to refer to two uprisings by Palestinians against Israel in 1987 and 2000.
But others, including the Australian National Imams Council and the Jewish Council of Australia, said the phrase was contested, and a ban would disproportionately target the Palestinian and Middle Eastern communities.
The inquiry’s final recommendation, conceived to limit a constitutional challenge by linking a ban to incitement of hatred or violence, was criticised as covering conduct that already fell under existing laws.
University of Sydney constitutional law expert Anne Twomey, whose submission warned against a ban on individual political slogans, told Guardian Australia Minns premier’s decision to wait on a challenge in Queensland was “wise”.
“Apart from any legal challenge, [the government] might also consider whether the ban on those slogans in Queensland has been counterproductive, resulting in greater use of them in defiance of the government and as a protest against restrictions on speech.”
Minns’ comments on Tuesday have led some critics to question the logic of his commitment.
Nick Hanna, the legal representative for the protest groups that won the anti-protest laws challenge, who is also representing protesters charged under the Queensland ban, said it was “extraordinary that Minns is basing his decision as to whether or not to introduce laws in this state on the outcome of proposed court proceedings to challenge a different law in a different jurisdiction”.
“As a result, Minns cannot possibly know what the legal arguments the challenge there will entail and what, if any, bearing they will have on the ability of a similar ban to withstand a challenge here.”
The NSW Greens MLC and justice spokesperson, Sue Higginson, said it was “reassuring that it seems the premier has actually recognised the risks and dangers to his own credibility and reputation through pursuing draconian and invalid laws”.
Minns told 2GB on Tuesday there was a greater need for “civic leadership” in maintaining social harmony.
“It can’t all just be legislative change and outright banning of things.”
