‘Oozing Pain’: Plea For Politicians To Tackle Hate Speech

Russell
Palmer Political reporter

Political parties are
being urged to go back to hate crime and hate speech
recommendations laid out by the inquiry into the
Christchurch terrorist attacks.

The Law Commission
released the final
report from its review on hate crime laws this week,
calling for a strengthening of the system rather than new
offences.

The government said its focus was on
reducing the number of victims of crime, and the report
showed in a broad sense “our current hate crime laws are
working”.

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith said the
government would consider the Law Commission’s
recommendations “in due course”.

“We’re making good
progress, but there’s still lots more work to do.”

But
Federation of Islamic Associations (FIANZ) spokesperson
Abdur Razzaq told RNZ that although the Law Commission had
done a thorough job, it was far too constrained by its terms
of reference, which kept hate speech as well as anything not
already considered an offence out of scope.

“The Law
Commission had an excellent engagement process, I mean, A+.
But their hands were tied,” Razzaq said.

FIANZ has for
years been pushing for the work of the Royal Commission of
Inquiry to be continued, with Razzaq saying that would be
“the baseline” for safety for all New Zealanders.

“We
know there’s a direct connection between hate speech and
hate crime. Even the Royal Commission emphatically said so,
and then also the Human Rights Commission, in their report,
said an extraordinary link.

“The latest police data is
there’s one hate crime against a Muslim … every 54
hours.”

The data he referred to points to a 7 percent
increase in recorded hate crimes against Muslims in New
Zealand – the most targeted religious group – from 2024 to
2025 (September to August).

Razzaq said he met
recently with some of the victims of the Christchurch terror
attack who survived.

“They still have the bullets in
their body, and it’s oozing pain … the thing is, every
single case of terror in the last eight years, every single
one, bar none, there was hate rhetoric
before.”

Successive governments had failed to
implement the hate speech changes the Royal Commission of
Inquiry recommended, with Labour having botched two
attempts, first having “absolutely made a hodge” of
explaining hate speech then “just went in a totally
different tangent”.

“Then National came in: too-hard
basket,” Razzaq said. “Not just ‘too hard’ basket, it’s a
‘never-never’ basket”.

“It’s a political hot potato.
They said, ‘oh, we have to have the the balance between …
free speech’. We totally agree, but we’ve had hate speech
legislation since 1993. It just does not cover faith, it
covers all the others.

“Look, other countries have
done it … even in the United States where they have
freedom of information, the First Amendment. States also
have limits.”

The Law Commission responded to RNZ,
saying many – including communities directly affected by the
Christchurch attack – raised concerns , which were
acknowledged in the report.

“But it is not our role to
make recommendations outside our terms of reference,”
Commissioner Mark Hickford said. “It is for the government
to address whether any hate speech laws should be
developed.”

He said Goldsmith in March 2024 “requested
that the review of hate speech be withdrawn from the Law
Commission’s work programme”.

“The minister asked that
we conduct a narrower review of the law relating to hate
crime, focusing on whether the law should be changed to
create standalone hate crime offences (as recommended by the
Royal Commission).”

Labour justice spokesperson
Camilla Belich told RNZ New Zealand had “unfinished
business” considering and implementing the commission’s
recommendations.

“Any legislation on hate speech needs
to be carefully considered, and it is short-sighted that the
current government narrowed the Law Commission’s terms of
reference so it could not consider this. I understand they
still received a number of submissions stating hate speech
should be addressed.

“I commend the Law Commission’s
work, though it’s disappointing the government scrapped the
previous work on hate speech, which was already
underway.”

‘Win for every New Zealander’ – lobby
group

The Free Speech Union on Wednesday backed the
Law Commission’s report which “landed where we and thousands
of submitters urged it to”.

“This is a win for every
New Zealander who took the time to speak up,” said Free
Speech Union chief executive Jill Heather said in a
statement.

“What we opposed was building new, vaguely
defined crimes on top of a concept as slippery as hate, and
that is exactly what the Commission has declined to
do.”

Heather pointed to more than 4000 New Zealanders
responding “through our submission tool, adding to the
thousands who have consistently rejected attempts to turn
subjective judgements about ‘hate’ into new criminal
offences.”

Razzaq however rejected the suggestion the
original efforts to introduce hate speech laws had faced
pushback other than from the Free Speech Union.

“They
came up with a report that ‘we had 10,000 people who were
against the legislation’, now who were the 10,000, it was
click and send.

“I asked the Free Speech Union, were
there 10,000 different people? They said, ‘look, we don’t
know, it’s just one site’. So somebody could have sat there
and just click, click, click, click, click … that is not
public opinion.”

He urged action, saying the risk of
failing to make changes would allow hate speech –
particularly against religious groups – to
continue.

“The risk is we’ll have a lot more Brian
Tamakis. The risk is we’re going to have a fractured
society. The risk is people will be able to incite violence
against faith communities, and they’ll get away with
it.”

Destiny Church leader Brian Tamaki last month
called on followers to “purge” Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus
from New Zealand.

Police are investigating, and Prime
Minister Christopher Luxon dismissed
Tamaki’s comments, saying he did not listen to him,
while Labour leader Chris Hipkins called him a
“thug”.

Political parties had mixed
stances on hate speech reform, with the Greens and Te
Pāti Māori saying they supported legislating against hate
speech, National saying it did not, ACT calling for more
enforcement of current laws, and Labour promising to share a
detailed policy in due course.

RNZ sought comment from
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith, but he said he had nothing
to add at this stage to his statements about the Law
Commission’s findings.

RNZ has also sought comment
from Labour.

FIANZ in 2024 published a report
outlining definitions of hate speech,
including:

• Racial or Ethnic Hate Speech:
  Expressions that denigrate or demean individuals or groups
  based on their race or ethnicity
• Religious Hate
  Speech: Speech that vilifies or promotes hostility towards
  individuals or communities based on their religious beliefs
  or practices
• Disability-Based Hate Speech:
  Expressions that mock, belittle, or demean individuals with
  disabilities.
• Xenophobic Hate Speech: Speech that
  fosters animosity, prejudice, or discrimination against
  individuals or groups based on their nationality or
  immigration status.

The report gives a further
“litmus test” used by some other
countries:

• Describing group members as animals,
  subhuman or genetically inferior
• Suggesting group
  members are behind a conspiracy to gain control by plotting
  to destroy western civilisation
• Denying, minimising
  or celebrating past persecution or tragedies that happened
  to group members
• Labelling group members as child
  abusers, paedophiles or criminals who prey on
  children
• Blaming group members for problems like
  crime and disease
• Calling group members liars,
  cheats, criminals or any other term meant to provoke a
  strong
  reaction

© Scoop Media