The federal government has ruled out reviving its proposal changes to the Racial Discrimination Act amid renewed pressure in the wake of the fatal attack on the offices of satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.
The suggested changes - which proposed removing the words insult, offend and humiliate from section 18C – were axed by the government in August.
But supporters of the proposal have renewed their argument in the wake of the fatal terror attacks in Paris, which targeted editors and cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo.
Senator Cory Bernardi first reignited the debate on social media, five months after he claimed to have received hundreds of emails from Liberal Party members disappointed over the axing of the changes.
Human Rights Commissioner Tim Wilson has now backed his call, saying the global support for Charlie Hebdo showed that offend and insult should be removed from the Act.
Speaking on ABC Radio on Tuesday, Mr Wilson said depictions of the Prophet Mohammed may not be banned due to the legislation’s focus on race, but other cartoons would result in regular legal challenges.
“Charlie Hebdo and the events in Paris have clearly demonstrated around the world that people think people should have the freedom to offend and insult,” he said.
“There’s no ambiguity that Charlie Hebdo would be censored in Australia. The law only applies to race. It doesn’t apply to issues of religion, but there are some ethnic groups that are also religious groups.”
Complaints over cartoons have been brought before Australian courts under the Racial Discrimination Act, but none have been successful in gaining apologies or damages to date.
The history of legal cases dealing with s. 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act*
One failed case involved a complaint lodged against West Australian Newspapers Ltd, following the publication of a cartoon entitled “Alas Poor Yagan” in The West Australian newspaper on September 6, 1997.
The cartoon depicted Yagan, an ancestor of the Indigenous complainants who became the subject of legal proceedings to arrange the return of his head from London to Australia.
In addition to allegedly derogatory political commentary, the cartoon depicts the head of Yagan saying “Crikey, give me a warm beer and a quiet pommy pub any day”.
The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission dismissed the complaint in a ruling handed down in April 2001, finding that the “publication is not reasonably likely in all the circumstances to offend a reasonable reader”.
It further stated that while the cartoon “made inappropriate references to Nyungar ancestors and beliefs”, it did not breach the Act.
More recently, Fairfax Media apologised for a cartoon about the war in Gaza that sparked criticism and accusations of racism.
The Sydney Morning Herald, owned by Fairfax Media, apologised in an editorial in 2014 for the July 26 cartoon by Glen Le Lievre, saying the use of religious symbols in the piece comprised "a serious error of judgement".
The cartoon accompanied a column on the Israel-Hamas conflict by journalist Mike Carlton.
Further information regarding cases brought before Australian courts under section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act can be found here.
*Provided by the Australian Human Rights Commission as of December 12, 2013. Court documents were unavailable for approximately three cases.
Share
