Select a year:
30th October
2003
Hate case judge assures Americans no one is
going to prison
By Barney Zwartz
Religious Affairs Writer
October 30, 2003
source:http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/10/29/1067233246916.html
A Victorian judge has reassured Americans that the Christian
respondents in the state's first religious hate case do not
face jail.
Judge Michael Higgins told a tribunal yesterday he had received
a call from the Department of Foreign Affairs over concerns
about the case raised in a "considerable" number
of emails from Americans.
Both sides in the case, the first brought under Victoria's
Racial and Religious Tolerance Act, say it has attracted interest
in Muslim countries as well as in the West.
The Islamic Council of Victoria has alleged that Catch the
Fire Ministries, Pastor Danny Nalliah and speaker Daniel Scot
had vilified Muslims at a Melbourne seminar last year.
Judge Higgins, in the Victorian Civil and Administrative
Tribunal, said that Foreign Affairs had rung him after being
contacted by the US embassy. "They were concerned about
emails forwarded to the US asserting that these proceedings
are ones in which individuals could be subject to terms of
imprisonment. I indicated that this is not so, that these
are civil proceedings, and imprisonment will play no part."
Later, Islamic Council barrister Brind Woinarski, QC, said
the jail threat had been clearly promulgated on Catch the
Fire's website.
Judge Higgins said he was not concerned about who was responsible.
While the act provides for up to six months' jail, that would
not apply in this case.
"I've done all I think is necessary to allay those fears,"
he said. "As far as I'm concerned that's the end of it."
A Foreign Affairs spokeswoman said it was not the US embassy
but the Australian embassy in Washington that had been flooded
with emails. The embassy asked for some words to help in replying
to them, hence the contact with the judge.
Mr Nalliah, speaking outside the tribunal, said Catch the
Fire was not behind any email campaign, but acknowledged that
the case was news abroad. American television networks had
contacted him, the Washington Post had sought an interview,
and Christian human rights groups had sent out news releases
asking people to pray.
Islamic Council president Yasser Soliman suggested that the
Pakistani and Saudi Arabian governments were also following
the case. He told The Age: "The interest is not just
in the Western world."
Mr Nalliah said he helped the United States frame its international
freedom from religious persecution legislation in 1998, advising
the State Department and congressmen.
The State Department has an Office of International Religious
Freedom, with an ambassador at large. Mr Nalliah said it got
"a tremendous response... We've had Christians released
in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Vietnam and China".
Yesterday, Muslim convert Jan Jackson gave evidence that
she had been asked to attend the seminar in question by a
concerned Muslim friend who worked for the Equal Opportunity
Commission.
Replying to an objection, Judge Higgins said it could be
said that the worker arranged for Ms Jackson to be there and
it could be said that their view of what was incitement was
coloured.
Judge Higgins said it was appropriate to indicate his thinking
at this point, nine days into the hearing.
He said that when he first read the transcript of the seminar
he thought the first part breached the act, but as he read
on he had doubts.
"The speaker talks about concern for Muslims, the need
to create a dialogue with Muslims, he talks about the need
develop relationships with them, mixing socially etc.
"Is the document as a whole an incitement to hatred
as set out in (the act)?
"If you stop at page 67 it's pretty easy to say yes,
but when you go through the rest, then I think the first view
you might adopt starts to wane somewhat," the judge said.
The new law explained
Name of the Act: Racial and Religious Tolerance Act, 2001
Penalties: Under the act, individuals can be fined up to
$6000 and companies $30,000. Criminal charges can result in
six months jail.
Under the legislation there are civil and criminal sanction
for racial and religious vilification. The civil provisions
apply to conduct that promotes vilification on the basis of
race or religion and involves a conciliation process through
the Equal Opportunity Commission. People will be informed
of their options including the option of discussing the matter
with police. The final decision about whether to pursue the
matter as a civil or criminal matter rests with the person
making the complaint.
Definition: Serious racial vilification
A person (the offender) must not, on the ground of the religious
belief or activity of another person or class of persons,
intentionally engage in conduct that the offender knows is
likely-
(a) to incite hatred against that other person or class of
persons; and
(b) to threaten, or incite others to threaten, physical harm
towards that other person or class of persons or the property
of that other person or class of persons.
Exemptions: The act includes exceptions for conduct or discussion
that is engaged in reasonably and in good faith in relation
to:
an artistic work or performance;
a statement, publication, discussion or debate for any genuine
academic, artistic, religious or scientific purpose or which
may be considered in the public interest; and
a fair or accurate report on a matter of public interest.
Guidelines of banned behaviour:
Examples of behaviour that may be covered by the new Act include:
Writing racist graffiti in public places;
Making racist speeches at a public rally;
Displaying racist posters or stickers in a public place;
Vilifying racist or religious abuse in a public place; and
Offensive racist comments in a publication, including Internet
and e-mail.
|
