Do the World Youth Day Laws Institutionalise Discrimination in NSW?

The New South Wales Government has introduced far reaching laws for World Youth Day that provide police with extensive powers to arrest protesters and anyone deemed to be causing an "annoyance" to WYD Pilgrims, and issue fines of up to $5,500. Those in opposition to the laws state they are an infringement on civil liberties, whilst the government states that the laws are necessary to ensure order during the festival. The validity of the laws are now being challenged in the New South Wales Supreme Court.

Interestingly, the laws and the debate around the powers they provide to inhibit protests and opposition to the Pope and the World Youth Day festival open up another question: Do laws such as those introduced by the government for World Youth Day institutionalise discrimination?

It is important to note that this blog is not being anti-Catholic (or any faith for that matter) in examining this issue, and it certainly isn't our intention to criticise the celebration of any group in a festival such as World Youth Day. Our question is merely directed at whether the New South Wales government is discriminating against people of other religions, and those who have no religion, by limiting their right to free speech and peaceful protest during the World Youth Day festival. In short, should laws be made at the advantage of one group, where the laws infringe upon the freedoms of other group(s).

As John Stuart Mill stated in On Liberty:

"The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental or spiritual. Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest."

Interestingly, the New South Wales Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 does not make it unlawful to discriminate against someone on the basis of their religion. Precedents have been made in making it unlawful to discriminate against another on the basis of their ethno-religious background, but there is a clear defining difference between this and Religious Discrimination. In passing legislation that seeks to provide people of a Catholic faith a higher level of civil liberty than people who oppose the Catholic faith, or support a different religion (or no religion) the government could be seen as positively discriminating in favour of Catholics. This in turn institutionalises Religious discrimination within the Statute.

The fathers of Liberty, particularly the great French and US revolutionaries who instilled the concepts of freedom of speech and civil liberties in democracy would be aghast at the New South Wales' government's restrictive legislation. In Australia, we have been fortunate to have been raised within a culture that has historically been very open and free (we've never had to have a revolution or a civil war to demonstrate our independence). "A fair go" is instilled in our culture. So it makes one wonder why the New South Wales Nanny-State feel the need for such draconian laws that remove the basic and fundamental human rights to choice, freedom and protest.

The World Youth Day laws can be seen as a further slippery step towards removing other civil liberties and instilling further discrimination within the Statute, after the APEC laws. Employers are expected to ensure they take all reasonable steps to eliminate discrimination in their workplaces, however the State is able to introduce laws that openly discriminate? It seems a little incongruous to us that this double standard should apply.

Do you have any thoughts about workplace discrimination? Let us know!