Constitution Alteration (Right to Free Speech) 2025

High-Level Summary
The bill proposes to amend the Australian Constitution to explicitly enshrine the right to freedom of speech, ensuring that neither the Commonwealth nor any State can make laws that limit this freedom.

Summary
The Constitution Alteration (Right to Free Speech) 2025 aims to introduce a new Chapter IIIA with section 80A into the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900. This section will prohibit the Commonwealth or any State from enacting laws that limit freedom of speech, including the freedom of the press and other media. The alteration borrows language from the United States First Amendment, recognizing the essential role of free speech in a democratic society. If the bill passes, it will proceed to a referendum as per section 128 of the Constitution, requiring a majority vote from the Australian electorate and a majority of states to be enacted.

Argument For
Normative Bases
  1. Pro-Democracy
  2. ProTransparency
  3. Non-Discrimination

Enshrining the right to free speech in the Constitution will provide a clear and unequivocal guarantee of this fundamental democratic right, eliminating existing ambiguities and enhancing public confidence in civil liberties. It aligns with international human rights norms, such as Article 19 of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, which Australia is a party to. This constitutional protection would ensure that freedom of expression, including through the press and other media, is not subject to arbitrary legislative restrictions, thereby supporting a transparent and accountable government [Judgment].


Argument Against
Normative Bases
  1. Legal Principle
  2. Hobbesianism

Opponents may argue that the bill could lead to unintended consequences by making it more challenging to regulate harmful expressions, such as hate speech or misinformation, thereby threatening social stability and public order. The existing implied freedom of political communication has been sufficient for navigating the complexities of free speech within Australia's legal framework, allowing for a balanced approach that considers public interest and safety [Judgment]. Furthermore, the high threshold required for constitutional changes, including a nationwide referendum, suggests that such alterations should be reserved for issues with broad consensus and clear necessity, which may not apply in this case.


Date:

2025-02-12

Chamber:

Senate

Status:

Before Senate

Sponsor:

BABET, Sen Ralph

Portfolio:

Unspecified

Categories:

Civics, Discrimination / Human Rights, Democratic Institutions

Timeline:
12/02/2025

Comments (0)