Mehreen Faruqi (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I seek leave to table an explanatory memorandum relating to the bill.

Leave granted.

I table an explanatory memorandum, and I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The speech read as follows—

The inclusion of mandatory minimum sentencing in Labor's Hate Crimes Bill earlier this year was an absolute disgrace. When the bill came to the Senate, I made it clear that this was a disgusting breach of civil liberties, born from a completely unnecessary dirty deal between the Labor and Liberal Parties. And it was rammed through at the last minute in a highly charged political atmosphere that we now know was based on a hoax by known criminals. It now appears that the community and the crossbench were fed lies to manufacture consent for an attack on the rights of Australians to a fair trial.

When this bill passed, I didn't think I could be more disgusted by a gutless Labor Party that goes out of its way to align itself with Mr Dutton's Liberals.

The ALP 2023 Platform states the following: "Labor opposes mandatory sentencing. This practice does not reduce crime but does undermine the independence of the judiciary, leads to unjust outcomes, and is often discriminatory in practice."

Labor has not only once again capitulated to the Liberals, but in doing so they have acted in direct contradiction to their own party platform.

And, still, you know what the most galling part of this debacle is?

The original bill had the numbers to pass. There was no need to make a dirty deal with Mr Dutton. But as usual, Labor would rather deal with the Liberal Party to pass racist laws than work with the progressive crossbench.

We are not seeking to repeal the Hate Crimes bill, just the dirty deal that brought in mandatory minimum sentencing. The dangers of mandatory sentencing are well known.

Legal expert after legal expert tells us mandatory minimum sentencing simply does not work. It takes judicial decisions out of the hands of judges and courts and into the hands of politicians.

The Australian Law Reform Commission has highlighted that mandatory minimum sentences are discriminatory and in breach of our international human rights obligations.

The Law Council of Australia president, Juliana Warner, has said that mandatory sentencing laws are "arbitrary and limit the individual's right to a fair trial", and the organisation has warned that mandatory sentencing refuses to take into account the personal circumstances of an offender, and therefore, the laws disproportionately affect vulnerable groups.

Australian Lawyers Alliance spokesperson, Greg Barns SC, has said there is "simply no evidence" to support mandatory sentencing.

We do, however, have extensive evidence that mandatory sentences disproportionately and unfairly target First Nations people and other people of colour.

The Australian Law Reform Commission that mandatory sentencing increases incarceration, is costly, ineffective as a crime deterrent and can disproportionately affect marginalised groups.

Go and speak to any community lawyer or peak legal body and they will categorically tell you that mandatory sentences are unjust, inappropriate, and highly discriminatory. A recent Conversation article by legal scholars described the mandatory sentencing amendments that are "populist, knee-jerk reactions [that] are highly unlikely to make the community safer."[]

Politicians are not in a position to understand the individual circumstances of a case, and there is no justifying politicians intervening in judicial discretion.

I oppose mandatory minimum sentencing for all the reasons law experts have given, including because we should not strip the judiciary of its ability to assess cases individually, it undermines judicial independence, and it undermines a fair trial.

I receive racist, Islamophobic, and misogynistic hate constantly. I want consequences for hate crimes, but mandatory minimum sentencing makes no one safer. It is egregious, unjust and discriminatory.

I can already see the eyerolls from the Liberals as soon as I mention Islamophobia. Yes, Islamophobia exists. It is extensively documented.

I remind the Senate of Senator Sharma's shameful claim that there is a "fictitious Islamophobia which was not going on." And not a word of condemnation from anyone in this place. Imagine if that had been said about any other group.

The latest Islamophobia register's report documents the rise in anti-Muslim and anti-Palestinian hate. Muslim women are being spat at, punched in the face, their hijabs being torn off, racist graffiti is rampant, and two mosques have now had threats referencing the Christchurch Mosque massacre where an Australian man with an extreme far-right, white supremacist and Islamophobic ideology murdered 51 Muslims.

But to the Liberal Party, Muslim lives simply don't matter. We've known that for a very long time.

And Labor is meek, mediocre and morally compromised. They have again capitulated to the Liberals to push through this bad law.

And we must talk about the elephant in the room, the criminal attacks on the Jewish community that Labor and the Liberals appear to have exploited, weaponised, and politicised to push through these mandatory minimum sentencing laws.

Following the revelations that the caravan found with explosives was part of a "fabricated terrorist plot", Executive Officer of the Jewish Council of Australia, Sarah Schwartz, made the following comments:

Yesterday's statement from the AFP should prompt reflection from every politician, journalist and community leader who has sought to manipulate and weaponise fears within the Jewish community. The attempt to link these events to the support of Palestinians—whether at protests, universities, conferences or writers festivals—has been irresponsible and dangerous.

It is now clear that individuals are seeking to exploit the Jewish community, and the broader public's concern about antisemitism. Disinformation and irresponsible reporting is providing a permissive environment for these malicious acts. We restate our calls for politicians to act responsibly and stop using the Jewish community as political footballs to push divisive agendas.

The Prime Minister has serious questions to answer. If the AFP knew almost immediately that the caravan plot was a hoax and linked to organised crime, why did Labor whip up media hysteria and community fear? Did they push these laws through under false pretences?

There was no justification for mandatory minimum sentencing in the first place, but now that the truth is public, there is even more reason to repeal these provisions.

Sentencing should be up to judges, not politicians. And certainly not politicians in the Labor and Liberal Parties, who thrive on stoking fear and division. That is why these mandatory sentencing provisions must be repealed.

I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.