Globalise the Intifada: NSW Inquiry Targets Public Use

Published: 29 January 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

A New South Wales parliamentary inquiry has recommended restricting the use of the phrase “globalise the intifada” when it incites hatred, intimidation, harassment, or violence. The inquiry clarified that this recommendation does not constitute an outright ban, nor does it extend to phrases like “from the river to the sea,” which remain outside its scope. Labor MP Edmond Atalla, chair of the inquiry, confirmed the draft findings to Guardian Australia ahead of a final closed meeting on Thursday. The committee voted to table the report almost entirely unchanged.

The focus keyword “globalise the intifada” appears prominently in the debate, reflecting concerns about its use in political demonstrations. NSW opposition members have described the inquiry as rushed and predetermined, arguing that the recommendations risk criminalising conduct already covered by existing law. The inquiry, open for public submissions for only three weeks, received more than 500 submissions, of which only 150 were published.

Deputy chair, Labor MP Hugh McDermott, defended holding the inquiry over the holiday period, noting that multiple committee members, including Atalla, were overseas during parts of the process. “We have been in discussions nearly every single day,” McDermott said. Shadow attorney general Damien Tudehope criticised the draft, saying it would “ban one slogan but only in circumstances already captured by the Crimes Act.” He added that the recommendation could create confusion by giving the impression that other uses of the phrase were acceptable.

The report advises that legislation should proscribe the phrase “globalise the intifada” only when it is directly linked to incitement of harm, including hatred, harassment, intimidation, or violence. Legal experts have highlighted the importance of a “causal element” to avoid constitutional challenges. The phrase itself originates from Arabic, meaning uprising or shaking off, and is used by pro-Palestine supporters referencing uprisings against Israel. Members of the Jewish community have expressed concern, describing it as a call to violence against them.

The NSW Jewish Board of Deputies and the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ) supported a ban on certain slogans, including “globalise the intifada,” while other organisations such as Palestine Action Group, the Australian National Imams Council, and the Jewish Council of Australia rejected the notion that the phrases were inherently hateful. They warned that banning political slogans could infringe on constitutional freedoms.

Constitutional law expert Prof Anne Twomey noted that proposals targeting specific chants present complex legal challenges, especially when committees are expected to formulate robust laws in a limited timeframe. She remarked that the recommendation would be legally safer than a blanket ban, but careful implementation is essential. NSW already has laws under the Crimes Act addressing incitement to hatred or violence, but McDermott argued that naming “globalise the intifada” could increase the likelihood of successful prosecutions.

Legislative measures would allow defences for artistic, academic, or educational uses of the phrase, but officials acknowledged that determining incitement to violence could be subjective. Atalla suggested the historical context of the phrase should be considered, noting that “words alone may mean nothing to some, but they threaten the Jewish community.”

NSW Premier Chris Minns, who had signalled a desire to restrict the phrase following the Bondi attack in December, emphasised the independence of the inquiry. He stated he did not expect immediate legislation, awaiting the report’s submission to government. McDermott explained that holding a shorter, closed inquiry was justified given the urgency after the attack, and that submission extensions were granted due to community support demands on the Jewish organisations.

Atalla attended the final meeting via video link while on a humanitarian mission in Namibia, asserting that his responsibilities as chair were maintained. The committee previously convened twice: first to set the inquiry’s terms of reference on 22 December, and later on 13 January after public submissions closed. McDermott confirmed that members had read all 700 submissions, ranging in length from a single sentence to 40 pages.

The committee also reviewed existing hate speech laws and international best practices, including UK approaches. In the UK, the phrase “globalise the intifada” has not been banned outright, but police have acted under existing legislation to address chants calling for intifada during pro-Palestine protests. In December, three individuals were charged in London for using the phrase at a protest, highlighting the global attention on its implications. Including this development was the only amendment carried at the committee’s final meeting.

The inquiry’s measured recommendation reflects a balancing act between protecting free speech and addressing potential threats to public safety. Lawmakers and communities continue to debate how to respond to politically charged slogans that may incite violence. As NSW prepares for possible legislation, the phrase “globalise the intifada” remains under scrutiny, illustrating the challenges governments face when addressing sensitive political expressions.

Check our latest news