In a recent sit-down with Lawyers Weekly, Attorney-General Michelle Rowland reflected on the crafting of the newly legislated hate speech reforms and how, in a short time frame, the government moved to ensure passage of those laws.
In late January, the Albanese government passed what it called the toughest federal hate crime laws in Australia’s history, introducing far-reaching reforms across criminal, migration, firearms and customs law aimed at combating anti-Semitism, hate speech, and violent extremism.
The legislation follows the devastating anti-Semitic terrorist attack at Bondi Beach on 14 December 2025, which authorities say exposed gaps in the nation’s ability to respond to ideologically motivated violence and hate-based radicalisation.
At the centre of the reforms is the Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Act 2026, which significantly broadens Commonwealth hate crime offences and increases penalties.
The legislation ramps up penalties for hate-motivated crimes, creates aggravated offences for leaders and preachers who incite or threaten violence, broadens prohibited hate symbol offences, and allows hate-based organisations to be formally listed as banned groups.
Speaking at the time, Attorney-General Michelle Rowland stressed that the reforms make clear that hate, division and the radicalisation of young people will not be tolerated, describing the legislation as a vital step towards a safer and more unified nation.
“The legislation sends a clear message that those who seek to spread hate and division, including those who seek to radicalise our youth, will be met with appropriate penalties,” she said.
“The passing of these laws to combat anti-Semitism, hate and extremism is another vital step towards a safer, more unified Australia.”
In a recent episode of Legal Firesides, A-G Rowland discussed the significance of the reforms and how she and the federal government attempted to strike the right balance in drafting the bill that eventually became law.
Firstly, she said, the task involved building on the reforms implemented in the first term of the Albanese government, and secondly, it required an appreciation for the need to respond to the worst terrorist attack the nation has ever seen. This included, she said, drawing on the recommendations of anti-Semitism special envoy Jillian Segal.
“Putting these together in a short period of time, with urgency, but also with care, [was] the focus” of a six-week period leading up to the legislation’s passage, A-G Rowland said.
“I think it’s important for your listeners and viewers to be aware that whilst they are leading in terms of their breadth, they also do draw on existing frameworks that we already have in place, be they around listing terrorist organisations or state sponsors of terrorism. So, in that sense, whilst they are indeed very significant, they’re also really, in terms of the frameworks, they draw on existing precedents that we have in our criminal justice system.”
When asked how she, the Attorney-General’s Department, and the federal government looked to strike the right tone in drafting the amended laws, A-G Rowland noted that it’s not just about balance across the social and political spectrums but also ensuring balance “within the confines of what is permissible under our Constitution”.
“So, we were very careful to not only anticipate that these are the kinds of laws that would be challenged, so they needed to be robust [and] based on the most solid advice that we could obtain, well crafted, but also respecting that these are laws were responding to really horrific events, that the Australian people rightly demanded a strong response,” she said.
There was also, she went on, the “political dimension” – that is, what did the government think they could reasonably get through a Parliament in which the Labor Party does not have control of the Senate, and in the short time period that it had.
Additionally, the government needed to ensure proper processes were in place, the A-G continued.
“Whilst this was done in a condensed period of time, we did have consultation. As a starting point, we consulted the special envoy countering anti-Semitism. We did consult key Jewish communities, and we also needed to have proper processes of government – these are ones that had proper policy authority, and went through cabinet. We released an exposure draft. We wanted to ensure this was orderly, although it was being done in a condensed time frame,” she said.
As Prime Minister Anthony Albanese recognised following the Bondi attack, A-G Rowland reflected, “these were terrorists that had hate in their hearts but guns in their hands”.
The legislation that ultimately passed, she said, will be “doing a lot of work” to address that reality.
To watch Lawyers Weekly’s full conversation with Attorney-General Michelle Rowland, click here.
Jerome Doraisamy is the managing editor of professional services (including Lawyers Weekly, HR Leader, Accountants Daily, and Accounting Times). He is also the author of The Wellness Doctrines book series, an admitted solicitor in New South Wales, and a board director of the Minds Count Foundation.
You can email Jerome at:
