Page:Faruqi v Hanson (2024, FCA).pdf/58

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

universally been known by that nickname, including amongst Indigenous people, and the sign had, over some 40 years of display, "long ceased to have any racial connotation, even if it once did have that" (see [13], [27], [41]).

230 The point is also illustrated by Bropho (at [35]) in which the then-Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission described the relevant group as "Nyungar or Aboriginal" people but also considered, in the alternative, a broader group of people "not necessarily of Nyoongar or Aboriginal descent." It was held that the reasonable Nyungar or Aboriginal person would likely have found the impugned cartoon published in a Western Australian newspaper to be offensive, insulting, humiliating or intimidating, but that a reasonable member of the broader group would perhaps not have found it humiliating or intimidating, but only offensive or insulting: Bropho v Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission [2002] FCA 1510; 72 ALD 321 at [7] per Nicholson J.

231 In Kaplan, Mortimer CJ (at [509]) described there to be two groups, Jewish students at Brighton Secondary College in the audience to whom the impugned speech was given, and non-Jewish students in the audience. Her Honour held that separate findings should be made about each group.

232 Senator Faruqi's concise statement pleads that:

[T]he relevant group includes people who have the following attributes:

a. Persons of colour;

b. Migrants to Australia;

c. Persons with migrant heritage, born in Australia;

d. Persons who by virtue of their appearance have been incorrectly identified as migrants;

e. Muslim people;

f. Persons with visible signs or expressions of religion;

g. Persons who have been told to "go back to where they came from" or variations of that phrase due to their race, colour or national or ethnic origin; and/or

h. Persons who have experienced racism.

233 As explained above, Senator Hanson's tweet conveys messages targeting immigrants, people of colour and Muslims. As a result, I consider that the most appropriate groups for consideration are, first, people of colour who are migrants to Australia or who are Australians of relatively recent migrant heritage, and, secondly, Muslims who are people of colour in Australia. Those


Faruqi v Hanson [2024] FCA 1264
51