Stay up to date with the latest from the QCCL
We begin by acknowledging that a physical assault or threat of such in relation to an individual does not give rise to any issue of freedom of speech, as we will come back to in relation to proposed section 80.2 BB. Threats are not in any proper sense part of the communication of information or opinion which is protected by freedom of speech.
Read More“The effect of this legislation is to make ACMA the ultimate arbiter of what is information and what is not.”
Read More“These laws have clearly been rushed and should be withdrawn until there is further and more substantial consultation” says President Michael Cope
Read MoreNotwithstanding our submission that doxing offences in the form contained in the Bill should not be introduced, we submit that; if it were to be introduced, doxxing should be an offence only to the extent it can be equated to harassment or stalking as the unacceptable behavior and consequences are similar.
Read More
It is legitimate for the government to promote our personal safety by restricting information about how to make your own nerve gas but not legitimate for it to promote our safety by stopping political agitation which could, if unchecked, lead to widespread social conflict
Read More. Why then has the police service deployed the resources of a squad specially prepared and trained to meet serious violence in this case? Many members of the public might well conclude from this that these individuals were engaged in terrorism, when plainly they were not
Read MoreThere are new and draconian powers of warrantless stop and search once a person is the subject of a Firearms Protection Order
Read MoreThe Internet should not be regulated as a broadcast medium and yet that is what the Online Safety Act does.
Read MoreIt is our position that in order to ensure that Local Councils in the State properly comply with their obligations in this regard, section 5 (4) of the Peaceful Assembly Act ought to be repealed. That way, local authorities in this State would become subject to the same notification and Court review process as the police are.
Read More“The inability of government to act as arbiter in its own cause means that freedom of speech includes the right to make false claims about social and political matters. In order to sustain uninhibited political discourse, the state cannot prevent resort to exaggeration or offence or even to false statements”, says Mr Cope
Read MoreThe government's role as an intellectual arbiter of the truth in social and political debate must be constricted, if not completely denied. This is based on a deep skepticism about the good faith of those controlling the government. That skepticism flows from the fact that decisions about what is true or false, when made by those in power, are bound up with political perspectives of those in power. In that regard the government is not impartial when it comes to contested disputes about the facts underlying political life. This is not meant to be some conspiracy theory. It derives from the fact that in the words of Lord Acton “All power tends to corrupt.”
Read MoreThis legislation was introduced in 2004 at the peak of concerns about terrorism. Since then, we have learned that the law inappropriately prioritizes the secrecy of national security information over the administration of justice
Read MoreWe remain of the view that you cannot end racism and other pernicious ideas by censorship and policing. What needs to be done is to focus on addressing the root causes of why some people are attracted to such ideologies in the first place, including social isolation, growing economic insecurity and mistrust in government and the media.
Read More“The QCCL looks forward to the review recommending changes to the current whistleblower laws that significantly improve the protection for those who breach government secrecy in the public interest” says Mr Cope
Read MoreRestrictions on electoral expenditure are akin to the rules of debate in a meeting which restricts the length of speeches and provide for rights of reply. In the context of political speech, the restrictions are essential to fairness, in that the arms race between various political players is continuously increasing the cost of elections, which results in an increasing number of people being excluded from the political process. Capping expenditure would also help to create closer financial equality between candidates at elections
Read MoreIn our view 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 rights of other users of the space.
Read MoreMr O’Gorman posed the question does this mean that no practising Catholic can ever be a CEO of Essendon or any other football codes or clubs who have approved or have been silent on the circumstances of Mr Thorburn’s departure from Essendon
Read MoreThe expenditure cap for third parties should strike a fair balance between respect for freedom of speech and association, and the importance of preventing third parties exercising disproportionate influence in elections and being used to circumvent expenditure caps. The current proposal is that each third party can spend the same amount as all the mayoral candidate caps combined. This is absurd. This system permits every third party the same influence, in expenditure terms, as all the mayoral candidates combined. It is hard to see how this system would not inevitably lead to the exact outcome the system purports to be trying to avoid – that being the complete drowning out of other election participants’ voices.
Read More
