Free speech — News — Queensland Council for Civil Liberties

Strategic Review of the Human Rights Commission

Should the “procedural” limb in section 58(1)(b) be retained? If it is retained, should the consequence of non-compliance with the “procedural” limb mean the act or decision is unlawful?

Yes.

From the beginning the HRA was intended to have the most impact by decision makers taking it into account in their daily decision-making process, not by litigation. But some mechanism needs to exist to give that aim legal force. This provision is that mechanism. In our view, this provision is fundamental to ensuring that public entities comply with the Act. In our view failure to comply with the Act should result in the act or decision being unlawful.

Digital Duty of Care

The Government's proposal to impose a ‘duty of care' on social media companies will delegate censorship powers to private companies. In the face of possible fines, the companies will err on the side of caution when deciding whether or not to remove content. It will almost inevitably result in the removal of legitimate expression.

Flag Desecration Bill (QLD)

Flag burning is not an issue at large in our country. Instead, the context it is currently documented in is a very narrow one – by First Nations people at Australia Day protests. Viewed in this context, the act of flag burning takes on immediate meaning. When an Indigenous person burns the flag, they say they do not believe that Britain should have colonised their land, that the nation of Australia exists as a colonial construct validated only by the invalid doctrine of terra nullius and the systematic oppression it effected. That is a specific political viewpoint that cannot be suppressed validly

White Australia Party loses injunction bid against Commonwealth Hate Group Listing

Our position remains that it is safer to provide extremists with a peaceful outlet for their views and that the proper way to defeat those views is through debate and electoral politics, not criminal sanctions. While exposure to these views will undoubtedly cause distress to some members of the community, that is the price to be paid for living in a free society.

Queensland Council for Civil Liberties9 June 2026Free speech, High Court

Speech by Michael Cope for 19 April 2026 "Not our laws" rally

The Bondi beach terrorists, appear to have been hardline Islamists. Do we really imagine that had these phrases been censored, or all pro-Palestinian demonstrations banned, the Akrams would not have perpetrated their horror? To believe this is to refuse to take Islamist terror seriously.

SpeechesQueensland Council for Civil Liberties19 April 2026Free speech

The AFP and the policing of "social cohesion"

Modern policing apparently involves disrupting legal behaviour that makes people uncomfortable so the AFP told Parliament but in its letter to us it says something different…But surely we should believe what the AFP told Parliament?

Speech by Angus Murray to Just Peace - Palm Sunday Rally 29 March 2026

Arguably, George Orwell’s most famous novel is ‘1984’. It is set in a dystopic future world ravaged by global and civil wars which is shroud in government surveillance. It is a fictional book. It should not be a play book for how the world might be today. It was a caution and one which we all ought to heed to.

Today is a bad day for freedom of speech and public protest in Qld

“ Criminalising chants with harsh jail terms in respect of the biggest public protest issue since Vietnam is up there with other excesses of the Bjelke -Petersen government, “ Mr. O’Gorman said.

Media releaseQueensland Council for Civil Liberties5 March 2026Free speech

HATE SPEECH LAW CHANGES INSUFFICIENT

The QCCL condemns the statement of the police minister Mr Purdie that “the hate speech laws would criminalise phrases that led to people being murdered at Bondi” as not only unsupported by any evidence but as tending to undermine the moral responsibility of the bigots who perpetrated the mass murder at Bondi.”

QCCL opposes assault on Free Speech in QLD

The fundamental principle of freedom of speech in Australia, the UK and the US is that “ causing offence “ is an inevitable result of maintaining freedom of speech principles and rights.

Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism Bill 2026

The Bill will fundamentally rework and expand hugely hate speech laws as well as having the 2026 equivalent of the 1950s ban of the Communist party which was struck down by the High Court. It is simply performative politics.

Joint CCLs statement on the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism Bill

The atrocities at Bondi necessitate a response that will address the causes of violence and increase harmony. The NSW Council for Civil Liberties, Liberty Victoria and Queensland Council for Civil Liberties condemn the proposed Bill due to its remarkable impact on human rights and civil liberties, and because there is no evidence that it will make any of us safer.

AFP invesigations targetting social cohesion

The QCCL does not endorse the tenets of national socialism in any way. However, we have concerns about members of a criminal law enforcement agency taking action to ‘disrupt’ the lawful conduct of members of the Australian community because the conduct is denominated a ‘threat to social cohesion.’

Review of the Definition of a “Terrorist Act"

Our central submission is that the current definition should not be expanded. Terrorism should not be seen as a ‘catch-all’ term for serious crimes. The criminal law, with its established principles of criminal justice and procedure, already accommodate crimes which may constitute terrorism. Any further extension of the definition of terrorism would intervene in this system. It would enlarge the application of a wide set of powers that are both repugnant to civil liberties and inconsistent with these established principles of criminal justice

Inquiry into the under 16 social media ban

In our modern era, social media is absolutely essential to freedom of speech. Both children and adults have a right to freedom of speech. No doubt the right of children to speak is not as broad as that of an adult. No doubt, children are entitled to protection from some of the harms that might flow from freedom of speech. But they do have a right to access social media to communicate with their friends and to seek information.

SubmissionQueensland Council for Civil Liberties22 September 2025Privacy, Free speech, Children

Anti Semitism Envoy’s Report

“The Segal report is a rather woolly document - long on assertions and claims for power to be given to the Envoy but short on argument and facts.”

Letter from Education Mininster concerning Qld Music Awards

This letter responds to our letter of 16 April 2025. We are disappointed the Minister has doubled down on this anti free speech position. Unlike the Minister we are consistent eg we opposed the laws banning the swastika

LettersQueensland Council for Civil Liberties6 June 2025Free speech

Censorship in Queensland Arts (2)

Ms Green’s remarks, clearly fall within the bounds of protected speech. Criticising government policy is a cornerstone of a healthy democracy, and attempts to suppress such criticism, particularly within artistic expression, set a dangerous precedent. While public institutions may not always agree with the views expressed by individuals, it is wholly inappropriate for governments to use the withdrawal of financial support as a tool to punish or silence speech.

Censorship in the Queensland Arts (1)

It is a core belief of the QCCL that democracies are strengthened, not weakened, when space is made for peaceful dissent. A decision by the State Government to withdraw funding from the Queensland Music Awards due to one artist’s lawful political expression during an acceptance speech would set a deeply concerning and dangerous precedent.

Crime And Corruption (Restoring Reporting Powers) Amendment Bill

It is submitted that in relation to the Commission making a public statement both in relation to the corruption assessment stage and at the conclusion of the Commission’s investigations, the Bill should be amended to make it clear that the provision contained within Section 65A(4)(g) namely “whether the statement may unreasonably damage the person’s health, safety or wellbeing or privacy or reputation” should be given significant weight by the Commission in deciding whether to issue a public statement.

PRESS RELEASES & COUNCIL NEWS

filter by tag

filter by year

© 2025 QCCL

Info

Action