“Hate speech” moved to Crimes Act

If Christchurch mosque Imam Gamal Fouda gets his way, with “Hate speech” moved to Crimes Act, it will mean hate speech becomes a Crimes Act offense, a new sharia compliant “Bill of RIghts”, with those speaking out against Islamic sharia will suffer harsher penalities under Jacinda’s latest Government proposal. And faithful Canterbury Muslims have a long history of supporting and financing terrorism to hide!

Ordinary New Zealanders are already losing their jobs for speaking out against this agenda.

This is merely an attempt by local Muslims to silence opposition at a time when there has never been more evidence that the religion as we know it today was made up during the 8th and 9th centuries to unite various religious peoples that suffered brutal conquest under the Saracens. By translating the heresies of the various religions into the ruling language, power was given to those previously marginalised, they sought to spiritually legitimse their violence. The added to that the pagan rituals of dancing naked around the cube 7 times for each of the planetary gods they held, kissing white stones (which turned black) and throwing rocks at devils, kept everyone happy. Modern education completely eradicates the standard narrative taught in NZ mosques today.

There’s only one way to stop the great exodus of educated people in the West leaving the Islamic religion: “Hate speech” moved to Crimes Act! The Governments full Incitement-Discussion-Document.

The Government wants to make hate speech a Crimes Act offence and ramp up the penalties for inciting hatred or discrimination.

Details of the long-awaited reforms of the country’s hate speech laws were announced by Justice Minister Kris Faafoi on Friday morning.

The six proposed changes include protecting groups from hate speech on the basis of sex, gender, marital status or political opinion, and making “incitement to discriminate” against the law. It will also boost the maximum sentence for the offence from three months to three years’ imprisonment.

“Extreme speech that incites hatred is very real, and is harmful for those who experience it, and for groups that are the target of it,” Faafoi said.

“The changes, which we are proposing, are not about restricting anyone’s ability to engage in debate about issues.

“While saying nasty things to someone, or about someone, does not make for healthy and constructive relationship, it is not the type of speech that we are targeting.”

Bolstering hate speech laws was a recommendation of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Christchurch mosque terror attacks. The inquiry found there had only been one prosecution for “intent to incite hostility” under the existing law, and two civil claims.

However, the proposed changes to the law are likely to be fraught. There has been strong opposition to hate speech reforms from the political Right, which argues the Government was effectively criminalising insulting speech, and curbing freedom of expression.

ACT leader David Seymour said the Government’s proposed law changes would “put cancel culture on steroids”.

“This is a solution looking for a problem and will take away basic rights to free speech, it will shut down debate and make people too afraid to express valid opinions,” he said.

Faafoi said freedom of expression would remain protected under the changes, however, the right to free speech was not “absolute”.

“We know that people will have strong views both for and against these proposals,” he said.

Imam Gamal Fouda says freedom of speech should not mean tolerating hate speech. “This is not New Zealand. That is not us.”

Under the proposal, the Government will change the Human Rights Act 1993 and the Crimes Act so that more groups receive protection from hateful speech. The current law protects groups from hateful incitement on the basis of colour, race, ethnic or national origins.

The new law would make it an offence to incite hatred on the basis of sex, martial status, religious belief, ethical belief (meaning the lack of a religious belief), colour, race, ethnic or national origins, disability, age, political opinion, employment status, family status, or sexual orientation.

“There could be some instances where people hold political opinions and any hate speech directed could be inciting hatred. That’s not necessarily the ground that we’re most concerned about. But again, we’re asking for people’s opinions,” Faafoi said.

The Crimes Act offence would make it a crime to “intentionally incite/stir up, maintain or normalise hatred” against any such group. It would be punishable by a maximum of three years’ imprisonment or a fine of up to $50,000.

“Normalising hatred means that, if I were to try and convince you to hate someone, and you didn’t already hold that feeling, then I have changed your opinion. You may already hold that opinion and I may want to reinforce that opinion with you, and that is normalising,” Faafoi said.

The civil liability for inciting hatred under the Human Rights Act will also be expanded to include “intentionally incite/stir up, maintain or normalise hatred” and “incite others to discriminate against”.

A final proposal would clarify that “trans, gender diverse, and intersex people” were protected under the law, under protections for groups on the basis of “sex”.

Faafoi ruled out introducing “hate crimes” into the law.

The Ministry of Justice would receive public submissions on the law change, up until August 6.

Alongside this, the Government would also seek public submissions on what changes people could be made to make New Zealand more socially cohesive.

Hate speech to become Crimes Act offence with harsher penalities under Government proposal


  1. A chilling effect on free speech, that is intended to discourage criticism of Islam, Koran, imaginary Allah and evil Muhammad. Simply read a Koran (available online) and see for yourself the hate inside, along with the avocation of extreme violence against other humans.

Comments are closed.