<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?> <docID>337693</docID> <postdate>2025-02-06 14:11:51</postdate> <headline>Mandatory jail for terror as hate speech laws pass</headline> <body><p><img class=" wp-image-337694" src="https://citynews.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/20250205126058679056-original-1-scaled.jpg" alt="" width="969" height="646" /></p> <caption>The display of Nazi symbols will carry a one-year prison sentence, under Tony Burke's amendments. (Lukas Coch/AAP PHOTOS)</caption> <p class="wire-column__preview__author"><span class="kicker-line">By <b>Kat Wong and Dominic Giannini</b> in Canberra</span></p> <p>People found guilty of displaying terror symbols or some terrorism offences will spend time in jail after amended hate speech laws passed parliament.</p> <p>The legislation, which cleared the Senate on Thursday, will create new offences for threatening force of violence against particular groups, including on the basis of race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability or political opinion.</p> <p>Mandatory minimum prison sentences were folded into the laws at the eleventh hour after Labor caved to the opposition's demands for stronger action against anti-Semitism.</p> <p>The display of Nazi or terrorist symbols will carry a one-year mandatory prison sentence, three years for financing terrorism and six years for other terrorism offences under amendments put forward by Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke.</p> <p>This can be mitigated by up to 25 per cent if there is co-operation with law enforcement.</p> <p>Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was critical of mandatory minimum sentences when the coalition first announced its plan to pursue the amendments, and Labor's policy platform argued these measures won't work and would only take away judicial independence.</p> <p>But after months of escalating anti-Semitic incidents - including the firebombing of a synagogue and a caravan filled with explosives being found with a list of Jewish targets - Mr Albanese capitulated.</p> <p>"We want people who are engaged in anti-Semitic activities to be caught, to be charged and to be put in the clink - that's my priority," he told reporters in Townsville.</p> <p>Labor also passed a coalition amendment to add advocating force or violence by causing damage to property to the legislation.</p> <p>Members of the opposition like shadow attorney-general Michaelia Cash celebrated Labor being "dragged kicking and screaming" and Opposition Leader Peter Dutton said he was pleased.</p> <p>"Unless people know that there is a consequence for their actions, it will continue and we are not going to allow that," he told reporters in Canberra.</p> <p>But members of the crossbench have lashed the government and issued warnings over the mandatory minimums.</p> <p>"This is what Labor has become under Prime Minister Albanese - a hollow shell that stands for nothing," Greens senator Mehreen Faruqi told the Senate.</p> <p>"Mandatory sentences are unjust, they are inappropriate and they are extremely discriminatory."</p> <p>Independent Zoe Daniel said she supported the legislation's passage but took issues with mandatory minimums as they "do not reflect good parliamentary practice or good governance", while senator David Pocock said the government "took a good bill with broad support that was long overdue, and politicised it and added a whole lot of stuff to it that makes it very, very hard to vote for".</p> <p>In the upper chamber, the Greens ultimately joined the major parties in supporting the bill while six senators - Ralph Babet, Fatima Payman, Gerard Rennick, Tammy Tyrrell, Alex Antic and David Pocock - voted against it.</p> <p>Mr Albanese wouldn't comment when asked why he rolled over for the coalition's demand to mandatory minimums despite Labor's opposition.</p> <p>Normal caucus procedures were followed, Mr Albanese said, although the partyroom was kept in the dark about the government's amendments at the start of the week.</p> <p>Amendments or legislation can sometimes be tabled before being brought before caucus to tick off but is then retrospectively presented at the next meeting.</p> <p>It is understood cabinet didn't meet on Wednesday either, ahead of the amendments being tabled late in the evening but it did meet on Monday.</p> </body>