letter to the Lord Mayor concerning free speech in Brisbane City

Office of the Lord Mayor
GPO Box 2287
Brisbane Qld 4001

Dear Lord Mayor

I write to you on behalf of the Council in relation to the City Council’s regulation of political speech, particularly in King George Square.

The Council has had several complaints over the last four or five years about the approach by the City Council to those who wish to exercise the right to freedom of speech in the square and other places.

We note that section 17 of the Public Land and Council Assets Local Law 2014, prohibits the following activities without a City Council permit:

A.    The use of amplification devices

B.    The distribution of written material and the use of placards etc

C.    The setting up of tables

We have seen a permit issued by the City Council which purports to prohibit participants in a public assembly from directly approaching members of the public not participating in the Public Assembly for the purpose of advancing their cause or beliefs”. Firstly, it is our view that there must be some doubt as to whether that provision is authorised by section 17, since there is no provision in schedule 1 against people speaking to other members of the public in the square. But clearly, this is a case where the City Council thinks it has that power or wishes it had that power.

In our view this blanket prohibition on these activities in the Square and other malls is a clear breach of the fundamental right of Queenslanders to freedom of speech. It is the Council’s position that this law is a breach of the Human Rights Act.

The Council accepts as a matter of principle and under the Human R,ights Act, that the City Council is entitled to impose content neutral reasonable restrictions on the time place and manner in which freedom of speech is exercised in its malls. But this regulation contains no such provisions. There is clear international jurisprudence establishing the proposition that one of the first characteristics of a reasonable limit prescribed by law is that it should be expressed in terms sufficiently clear that people are able to work out what it is. It is entirely unsatisfactory that the exercise of political speech is subject to the unfettered discretion of a City Council official.

As we have noted, the City Council is no doubt entitled to impose restrictions to ensure that others in the mall are not harassed or have their enjoyment unreasonably diminished. But the specific limitations to be imposed on those assembling in the Square should be specified in the Law and not left to the unfettered discretion of a City Council officer

The by law should be amended to reflect the following:

• ·         In a noisy environment like a modern city, effective communication must involve speakers being able to amplify their voices within clear limits that respect the right of other users of the space.

• ·         Activists holding rallies in the square ought to be entitled to distribute leaflets so long as in doing so they are not harassing those in the mall or passing through it. Similarly, people ought to be able to approach others to engage in conversation about their political views. Those who do not wish to participate in those conversations should be entitled to walk away without further harassment by the person involved.

• ·         Finally, the City Council ought to facilitate organisations being able to set up tables from which to distribute their paraphernalia.

It must be said that the person who contacted us most recently about this topic acknowledges that no one has been charged in recent times with an offence for undertaking any of these activities without a permit. However, that is not to the point.

The right to freedom of speech is a fundamental right which the City Council in fact has a duty to facilitate. It should do so by enacting laws which comply with its obligations under the Human Rights Act.

Furthermore, it is our view the City Council’s decisions in the exercise of its powers should be subject to review by the Magistrates Court. We strongly disagree with the decision of the Courts which have excluded the City Council from the operation of the Peaceful Assembly Act. We will be making a submission to the Attorney General, that she ought to move an amendment to the Peaceful Assembly Act to provide any decisions by the Council in relation to protest activities in the malls are reviewable by a Magistrate in the same way as the decisions of the police.

We look forward to receiving your comments.

Yours Faithfully

Michael Cope

President

For and on behalf of the

Queensland Council for Civil Liberties

12 February 2020