Two other incidents over the weekend, the targeting of a business with ties to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation — a US-backed Israeli organisation linked to the massacres of unarmed Palestinians seeking aid — and a weapons company with links to the Israeli military, are also being referred to as justifying new laws. It is important not to conflate these actions against Israel with an attack against a Jewish place of worship. International human rights law, as well as our current laws, already place limits on protests that involve intimidation and violence.
So what is actually being proposed in response? The Allan government is suggesting the creation of a new criminal offence for wearing a face covering at peaceful protests, banning “dangerous attachment devices” (e.g. a chain, a bike lock) — which have long been used in non-violent civil disobedience — and criminalising peaceful protests around places of religious worship.
The ban on face coverings would be a first in Australia. It would mirror measures used in authoritarian states that force people to submit themselves to various forms of state surveillance.
Victoria Police has been using facial recognition software for years without any regulatory or legislative framework to prevent breaches of privacy. This technology, combined with a ban on face coverings at protests, would essentially amount to an obligation on behalf of individuals to submit to surveillance by the state, corporations and other groups that surveil protesters.
Unless you’re a mining company spending hundreds of millions buying politicians’ favour or can wine and dine decision-makers, peaceful protest is one of the main ways for people to hold governments and corporations to account. Protests for the eight-hour workday, women’s rights, First Nations rights and the anti-war movement have led to significant improvements in all of our lives.
Many people attending protests wear face coverings to protect their privacy and anonymity. For temporary migrants, the consequences of identification can include visa cancellation and detention. Far-right groups, abusers of gender-based violence and other political groups have all been documented as engaging in doxing, surveillance and retaliatory violence against people identified at peaceful protests.
Even with exemptions, a ban would mean that people who wear facemasks for reasons of health, disability status, or religious or cultural reasons would be at risk of police targeting and made to justify their use of a face mask.
Adding new repressive police powers against peaceful protesters only serves to increase the risk of escalating violence at already heightened public demonstrations. People will not stop taking to the streets on issues they care about, even if the state tries to stifle their voices. Donald Trump’s deployment of the National Guard in response to protests in LA shows us how deploying more state force at protests increases rather than decreases the risk of violence.
