Christopher Jon Bjerknes
Australia's "Racist harassment and incitement to racial hatred" law is so vague as to fail to notify a citizen of what conduct is proscribed by law. The Australian statute proscribes conduct intended to create animosity towards any "racial group" and vaguely defines "racial group" as follows:
"racial group means any group of persons defined by reference to race, colour or ethnic or national origins"
No set of unambiguous definitions inform the public as to what are the "races", "colours", "ethnic origins" or "national origins" intended by this law. Since the citizen has no standard by which to judge his or her conduct, no proscribed conduct in this law is sufficiently defined as to enable the citizen to know which conduct is criminalized. In addition, the police and courts may arbitrarily define that which is left undefined by the statute, inevitably and necessarily resulting in discriminatory and abusive selective enforcement of the law.
Australia's "Racist harassment and incitement to racial hatred" law criminalizes normal conduct. It is human nature to vilify villains. Nothing prevents any group of human beings from being villainous, and therefore no group of human beings may be made immune by law to vilification. Human beings have always engaged in criticism of ethnicities, races, colors, and nationalities, and doing so is normal human conduct throughout all of recorded history. The entirely selective and arbitrary ex post facto determination of which human groups constitute "races", "colours", "ethnic origins" or "national origins" by the police and prosecuting officials and the courts taking place in Australia has, and is intended to have, a chilling effect on the healthy and entirely normal conduct of political, religious and public discourse. Such a chilling effect on free speech and public discourse is detrimental to the public good, and is abusive of individual rights.
Australia's "Racist harassment and incitement to racial hatred" law violates the right of self defense. When a group of persons holds to a belief system, and/or engages in conduct, which harms, degrades and/or discriminates against any individual or other group, all members of society have not only the right, but also the duty to protect themselves from said villainous group. One means of self defense is to vilify the villainous group. The law not only violates an individual's right of self defense, it works against the public's general best interests by muzzling watchdogs and granting immunity to villains.
Australia's "Racist harassment and incitement to racial hatred" law violates all citizens' fundamental rights to equal protection under the law, for where a "racial group" by its creed, its conduct, and/or its self description commits "Racist harassment and incitement to racial hatred" towards others, this group is granted immunity for its offensive conduct, while those who would criticize it for its offensive conduct are barred from doing so by law. In this manner a privileged class and a subservient class are arbitrarily and for the first time established by law and only by law, which is illegal. The criminal is immune to criticism and the watchdog is muzzled and imprisoned for sounding an alarm. While the law establishes several absolute defenses, those defenses depend on subjective mental states and arbitrary definitions left undefined by law, which unlikely sanctuary under the law encourages those who would otherwise speak out in defense of themselves and the nation to remain silent or leave their fate uncertain and in the hands of the State to arbitrarily determine and with bias that cannot be exposed or criticized for fear of additional prosecutions.
The violations of freedom of speech and political freedom will be addressed in additional articles as time permits.