A plan to restrict the display of Nazi symbols, according to Australia’s domestic espionage agency, could help prevent extremist recruiting.
The bill, which was sponsored by Michaelia Cash, the shadow attorney general, is currently the focus of a parliamentary investigation.
It would make it illegal to display Nazi symbols, such as the swastika and the Nazi salute, and punish offenders with up to a year in jail.
After white nationalists seized control of a far-right demonstration on the State House steps, the Victorian government will take the Nazi salute into consideration for ban.
Also receiving harsh criticism is Victoria Police’s performance, which has declined to explain why the Neo Nazis were not detained.
Displays that are educational, historical, journalistic, artistic, or religious in nature in relation to Buddhism, Hinduism, or Jainism would not be subject to the law.
Following the appearance of several guys wearing all black who gave the “Sieg Heil” salute at an anti-trans event in Melbourne last month, Cash made his proposal.
It comes after a slew of state-based policies that are in effect or being implemented around the nation.
The salute is currently prohibited in Victoria, and Nazi symbols were made illegal to display in June of last year.
Queensland, Tasmania, Western Australia, and South Australia are also exploring similar laws. NSW followed in August.
ASIO stated before the parliamentary inquiry that the restriction “would assist law enforcement in early intervention” in one of the numerous submissions submitted on the proposed federal bill.
According to ASIO, “nationalist and racist violent extremists (NRVE) adopt specific imagery and terminology to signal their ideology, foster a sense of in-group belonging among followers, and provoke or intimidate ideological rivals.”
Nationalist and racist organisations in Australia are still concentrating on radicalization, recruiting, and getting ready for what they see as the imminent collapse of society and the chance to put their ideals into practise.
The submission stated that, despite having a commitment to violence in principle, extreme far-right organisations were more concerned with propagating their ideas.
Lone actors who might be driven by those ideas posed a larger threat.
