Anti-hate laws – hate speech and hateful behaviour

Examples of behaviour that may be vilification include: 

• speaking out against or encouraging hatred of people because of a protected characteristic in a way that could make other people hate or ridicule them 

• using brochures, stickers, broadcast or publications, websites, email or social media to spread hatred, for example, disseminating pamphlets at people’s homes with hateful messaging about people relating to a characteristic that is protected

• speech directed at an individual that can be heard by the public. For example, the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal found a family was being vilified because of their race after their neighbours repeatedly racially abused them and it was found the neighbours wanted other neighbours and members of the public to hear. In other words, the neighbours were encouraging hatred in others of that particular family (see Khalil v Sturgess)

• publishing claims that a person or group with a protected characteristic is involved in serious crimes without any proof 

• verbally abusing someone on public transport because of their protected characteristic 

• encouraging violence against people, or damaging their property, because of their protected characteristic 

• web based abuse, including encouraging or contributing to hateful content in public chat forums, livestreams, posts and videos 

It is also against the law to give permission or help someone to vilify others. 

Examples of behaviour that are unlikely to be vilification include:  

• being critical of a religion, or debating ideas within that religion, in a way that does not encourage others to hate people who hold that particular religion  

• actions that may be offensive, but are not hateful and do not encourage others to hate, disrespect or abuse people based on protected characteristics  

• behaviour that takes place in private, such as a conversation between friends inside someone’s home that is not streamed to the internet or overheard by neighbours  

If behaviour is not vilification it could still be the basis for a complaint of discrimination if it takes place in one of the areas of public life covered by the Equal Opportunity Act. 

For example, Ranjit complains that a local bus driver asked him where he was from, told him to sit at the back of the bus and sniffed loudly at him as he walked past. The encounter was not overheard or seen by anyone else as no one else was on the bus.  This is not vilification as vilification protections only apply to public conduct. But Ranjit might be able to make a complaint about racial discrimination. 

Inciting hatred means: 

• a person engages in conduct that is likely to incite hatred against serious contempt for, revulsion or severe ridicule towards people or groups  

• a person engages in that conduct because of the protected characteristic of another person or group of persons, and 

• the person intends their words or behaviour to incite these responses or believes it will probably do so. 

Threatening physical harm means: 

• a person threatens physical harm to a person or group of people, or damages property  

• a person makes those threats because of the protected characteristic of the other person or group, and 

• the person intends the other person or group to believe the threat will be carried out, or thinks that they will probably believe the threat will be carried out  

A single event can be vilification, or vilification can be multiple actions over time. 

Victoria Police can arrest and charge someone if their conduct appears to be a crime and will consider the facts and circumstances of each case to determine whether to prosecute an offence. 

The Commission cannot assist with criminal offences, but we can refer you to Victoria Police with your consent, if you think you may have experienced a crime. We can also recommend referrals for support.  

You can call us on 1300 292 153 to speak with our trained staff.