Australia’s legal framework addressing antisemitism, hate speech and extremism is evolving rapidly. Recent Commonwealth reforms, together with foreshadowed changes in Queensland, signal heightened regulatory scrutiny and increased expectations for organisations – including schools.
For school leaders and boards, understanding both the legal position and the governance implications is critical.
Queensland’s Current Position
Queensland does not currently have a standalone criminal “hate speech” offence in the way the term is commonly used. Instead, hate-based conduct is addressed through:
- General Criminal Code offences (such as threats, assault, intimidation or harassment), where bias may be treated as motive or aggravation; and
- Civil vilification provisions under the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 (Qld).
Under that Act, it is unlawful to publicly incite hatred, serious contempt or severe ridicule toward a person or group because of protected attributes, including race and religious belief or activity. Complaints are typically managed through the Queensland Human Rights Commission, with a focus on conciliation and education rather than criminal prosecution.
Importantly for schools, conduct within assemblies, classrooms, school events and online student interactions may constitute a “public act” for the purposes of vilification laws.
Proposed Queensland Legislative Reforms
The Queensland Government has recently foreshadowed significant legislative reforms aimed at combating antisemitism, hate-based conduct and extremist activity.
In February 2026, the government introduced the Fighting Antisemitism and Keeping Guns out of the Hands of Terrorists and Criminals Amendment Bill 2026 to the Queensland Legislative Assembly.
The Bill proposes a number of reforms intended to strengthen protections for faith communities and respond to extremist conduct. Key elements include:
- Increased penalties for displaying prohibited extremist symbols, with maximum penalties rising to 150 penalty units or two years’ imprisonment
- New offences targeting particular extremist expressions linked to vilification or the incitement of violence
- Criminal offences relating to assaults on ministers of religion, particularly where the conduct interferes with lawful religious worship or religious assemblies
- Additional protections for religious gatherings and places of worship
- Expanded offences relating to terrorism and extremist planning, together with broader police powers
- Further firearm restrictions aimed at preventing access to weapons by individuals linked to extremist activity
If enacted, these reforms would represent a significant shift in Queensland’s approach, moving beyond the historically civil-focused vilification framework toward stronger criminal responses to extremist conduct and threats to religious communities.
Strengthened National Framework
At the Commonwealth level, legislation commencing in January 2026 introduced expanded mechanisms to ban and criminalise hate organisations, strengthen controls over hate symbols, and apply aggravated sentencing factors in relevant cases through the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Act 2026.
The Act establishes a national framework allowing the Commonwealth to formally declare certain organisations as hate organisations where they engage in hate crimes or advocate politically motivated violence. Once an organisation is declared, it becomes a criminal offence to knowingly lead, recruit for, train with, fund or materially support that organisation.
These reforms aim to disrupt extremist networks and prevent the spread of ideologically motivated violence.
A significant feature of the new Commonwealth legislation is the introduction of an aggravated grooming offence targeting the extremist radicalisation of children and young people.
Prior to these reforms, Commonwealth law addressed terrorist acts, advocacy of violence and sexual grooming offences, but there was no specific offence capturing the early-stage ideological grooming of young people toward extremist violence.
The new offence applies where an adult engages in sustained or purposeful conduct directed at a child or young person with the intention of steering them toward:
- Violent activity: or
- Extremist conduct that endorses or normalizes violence.
The legislation recognises that radicalisation often develops gradually and relationally, frequently through online communication or repeated ideological influence. By introducing this offence, the Commonwealth has created a legal tool enabling authorities to intervene earlier in the radicalisation process, before a young person becomes involved in serious criminal or terrorist activity.
Practical Implications for Schools
While schools are not law enforcement bodies, they are environments where early indicators of hate-based conduct or extremist vulnerability may first arise.
The evolving legal landscape heightens expectations around:
- Clear anti-vilification and anti-hate policies
- Defined reporting and escalation processes
- Parent and community communication protocols
- Appropriate engagement with external authorities where necessary
The proposed Queensland reforms and the new Commonwealth aggravated grooming offence reinforce the importance of early identification of risk. Schools may encounter situations involving racist or antisemitic conduct, the sharing of extremist symbols or materials, or concerning ideological influence over students.
Although the relevant offences are primarily directed at serious criminal conduct, schools are often the first settings where warning signs emerge. Appropriate safeguarding responses — including early intervention, engagement with parents, and escalation where necessary — remain critical.
Radicalisation should generally be approached as a well-being and child-safety issue, requiring proportionate and supportive responses.
Schools should ensure their safeguarding, behaviour management and complaints frameworks are aligned with these developments.
Governance Responsibilities and Leadership Accountability
Compliance expectations extend beyond students and staff to those responsible for oversight and governance.
In New South Wales, recent developments have strengthened regulatory expectations in this area. Amendments to the Crimes Act 1900 introduced section 93ZAA, which criminalises publicly inciting hatred toward a person or group on the grounds of race.
Following this change, the NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA) updated its school registration manuals in early 2026. Under the revised framework, non-government schools must ensure that Codes of Conduct for staff and Responsible Persons expressly prohibit hate speech, with the concept aligned to conduct captured by section 93ZAA.
Responsible Persons may also be required to address hate speech in governance declarations as part of the “fit and proper person” requirements for school registration.
Embedding governance measures of this kind:
- aligns board-level conduct with legislative standards
- supports school registration and compliance obligations
- demonstrates a proactive commitment to preventing hate-based conduct
- strengthens accountability at the highest level of the organisation.
Taking a proactive approach
The evolving legislative environment reflects broader community expectations. For schools, the response should be structured and preventative rather than reactive.
Clear policies, strong leadership, consistent enforcement and robust governance practices will position schools to navigate this landscape confidently while maintaining safe, inclusive learning environments.
Have a Question ?
If you need assistance or legal advice regarding the above, Vocare Law can well assist. Contact our office on 1300-VOC-LAW / 1300-862-529 or email: enquiry@vocarelaw.com.au
This article was written by Amber Stanton and Alistair Macpherson from Vocare Law’s Brisbane office.
**The information contained herein does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice and is for general informational purposes only.
