‘Outrageous overreach’: Pro-Palestine activist wins fight against controversial NSW anti-protest laws

A pro-Palestine activist has dubbed controversial anti-protest laws an “outrageous overreach” after they were thrown out and ruled “invalid” by a court. Joshua Lees launched a constitutional challenge action against the state of NSW’s anti-protest laws on behalf of the Palestine Action Group (PAG). The new laws, brought in less than a month after news of the Dural caravan plot broke, gave police fresh powers regarding protests at or near places of worship. Justice Anna Mitchelmore ruled in favour of Mr Lees on Thursday, finding the law “impermissibly burdens the implied constitutional freedom of communication on government or political matters and is invalid”. She ruled the law “goes beyond what is necessary to achieve its purpose”. Mr Lees accused NSW Premier Chris Minns of an “outrageous overreach” by introducing the laws in a speech outside the NSW Supreme Court on Thursday morning. “The Supreme Court of NSW has just found that the anti-protest laws that Chris Minns rammed through parliament in February, specifically relating to places of worship, are unconstitutional. They are invalid,” Mr Lees said. NSW Greens MP Sue Higginson said Mr Minns had been warned “loud and clear” that he had gone too far, accusing him of creating a “moral panic”. “And when governments create moral panics, they make grave mistakes, and they do go too far,” Ms Higginson said outside court. “We now know no executive, no Premier, is able to embolden police to burden that freedom (to protest). “We are not and we will not become a police state. It is just not the fitting of a mature and a sophisticated democracy.” Mr Minns said the judgment was “disappointing”, but did not amount to having “free reign outside places of worship” for protests. “Although the Supreme Court has determined that a police power to ‘move on’ persons engaging in obstructing, harassing and other conduct as part of a public assembly outside places of worship is invalid, the decision has no impact on the offence introduced recently in the NSW Government’s places of worship laws that make it a crime to impede, harass, intimidate or threaten a person accessing a place of worship,” Mr Minns said in a statement. “These laws were designed to strike the right balance between community protection and the freedom of political expression.” Mr Lees said protests would continue despite the peace deal between Israel and Hamas. “We’re going to keep fighting until we have genuine peace for the Palestinian people,” Mr Lees said. “That means peace with justice. That means peace with liberation and freedom. That’s what we’ve always fought for, and we’re going to continue to fight for that. And the judgment today is that there’s one less obstacle in fighting for that.” He emphasised the case was never brought about to win the right to target places of worship — which he maintained PAG had never done — but to fight the law’s broad provisions. “These laws were about targeting anyone who protested near a place of worship, even if it had nothing to do with that place of worship or those worshippers,” Mr Lees said. Mr Lees’ legal team had argued the language in the law was broad and would likely leave many protest sites vulnerable to the laws given most protests take place in city centres. Felicity Graham, for PAG, claimed the law’s provision stretched police powers “beyond its legitimate bounds when analysed for constitutional validity”. However, Michael Sexton SC, appearing for the state of NSW, argued the legislation was confined to protecting parishioners who were attending or leaving a place of worship and were intended to be read alongside other laws in order to give police appropriate context. ‘Lies and conspiracy’ claim on Dural caravan Mr Lees earlier accused Mr Minns of passing the laws under a cloud of “lies and conspiracy” while speaking outside court, insinuating the Premier knew the Dural caravan was part of a con job when the laws were rushed through. Rather than a potential anti-Semitic attack, an explosives-laden caravan found at Dural in Sydney’s northwest was a fake terrorism plot with ties to organised crime, police later revealed. “This entire Dural caravan episode … the Minns government knew actually that this was all part of a criminal con job and yet he kept the public and the parliament in the dark about this whole affair while he rushed through laws which take away our right to protest,” he said. Mr Minns maintained the government stood by the protest crackdown and the “valid” laws. “I’ll note that the applicant … suggested that the government again was part of some plot or conspiracy in relation to the Dural caravan investigation, mirroring some of the more obtuse commentary from members of the cross bench and upper house,” Mr Minns said at a press conference.