Council:vilification laws need clarity

Arural Wimmera council believes more specific conditions need to be written into Victorian law to prevent people publicly displaying the Nazi swastika.

Earlier this year Beulah made international and national headlines after a couple flew a Nazi flag over a house.

Following complaints from Beulah community, Victoria Police and Yarriambiack Shire Council convinced the couple to remove the flag.

The incident revealed enforcement limitations police and the council had when dealing with offensive materials such as the flag.

It also prompted the council to make a submission to a State Government inquiry into anti-vilification laws under the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001.

The inquiry, exploring the effectiveness of and potential of expanding anti-vilification laws, has attracted more than 50 submissions from across Victoria.

Yarriambiack council chief executive Jessie Holmes said laws would need to change to set out, specifically, what was and was not, legal.

“There would need to be some really clear definitions around what you could and couldn’t do, which gave a direct power to act, because people will always find the grey areas,” she said.

“So, whoever had the authority, whether that’s local government or

Victoria Police, had really black-andwhite language to say, ‘regardless of the intent of flying the flag, with the exemption of museums and artefacts, it is not to be on display’.”

Under current law, the requirement is to prove that conduct could incite others to feel hatred, contempt or revulsion for a victim.

Victoria Police can also investigate vilification offences that encourage violence against people.

The commission has recommended changing wording of the law from ‘incites hate’ to ‘expresses or is reasonably likely to incite hate or strong feelings’.

Mrs Holmes said the Beulah incident proved the council and police had little authority to remove the flag.

“We didn’t have a legal leg to stand on – the legal advice we received was it would have cost us double our annual legal budget to prosecute the case,” she said.

“We spent quite a lot of resources in getting legal opinions and collaborating with Victoria Police in order to have the flag removed.”

Mrs Holmes said it was clear the flag had caused offence and was unacceptable in the Beulah community.

“The community was really clear that it was in no way a reflection of how the community felt,” she said.

“What people equate that flag with is white supremacy and racism – there’s symbolism around that flag, and people know that.”

She said the right to freedom of expression needed balance with what was acceptable in modern society.

“In a civil society, you have rights, but you also have responsibilities. People agree to live in society on the basis that those responsibilities and rights are agreed upon by common agreement of the community,” she said.

“In this circumstance the rights and responsibilities to not fly that type of flag outweighs the rights of being able to display this particular flag, which was the common agreement of the community.”

Yarriambiack Shire Council attended a May 28 hearing via video conference to submit its case to the inquiry.

Inquiry submissions remain open until September 1.