Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has long positioned himself as a champion of due process, transparency, and democratic norms. Kindness is not weakness, he tells us. Yet his government’s frantic push to ram through omnibus legislation aimed at curbing civil rights and liberties reveals a stark hypocrisy that threatens the very foundations of Australian democracy.

This sweeping bill, ostensibly designed to combat misinformation, hate speech, and online harms, has been expedited with minimal scrutiny, sidelining parliamentary debate and public consultation. It’s a move that not only erodes freedoms of expression and assembly but also exposes Labor’s selective adherence to the principles they so readily preach to others.

Their selectiveness is part-and-parcel of moving towards a two-tier justice system to the disadvantage of mainstream society. Keir Starmer’s United Kingdom has seen various highly publicised instances where such bias seemed to have taken place. The current football policing scandal in Birmingham around the Aston Villa and Maccabi Tel Aviv game is a good example where policing decisions were made in the name of social cohesion based on bad intelligence and confirmation bias.

Albanese has never hesitated to lambast international leaders for flouting democratic processes. Whether critiquing authoritarian regimes abroad or even allies like the United States under previous administrations for bypassing legislative norms, he has tried to build a reputation as a defender of transparency and accountability. His pointed criticisms of leaders who prioritise political expediency over proper governance, accusations of ‘rushing’ reforms without adequate review have been a staple in his foreign policy rhetoric. Yet, here at home, Albanese’s administration is doing precisely that by bundling complex measures into an omnibus package and fast-tracking it through Parliament amid a polarised national debate on social cohesion and free speech.

This double standard is not just ironic but naked hypocrisy. It’s a betrayal of the trust Australians place in their leaders to uphold the rule of law without favouritism. It also smacks of two-tier madness by turning what ought to be a tough stance on Islamic terrorism into a crackdown on free speech for everybody and not just those whose terrorist-inspired intent led to the murder of 15 Australians at Bondi.

Australia’s proud history as a pioneer of liberal democracy dates back to the 19th Century. From the secret ballot introduced in Victoria in 1856 (earning the moniker ‘the Australian ballot’ worldwide) to the early adoption of women’s suffrage and workers’ rights, our nation has been a beacon for progressive governance rooted in individual liberties. We have weathered world wars, economic depressions, and social upheavals by clinging to these principles, ensuring that reforms are debated openly and inclusively. Labor’s approach, however, smacks of anti-democratic impulses more akin to the very autocrats they condemn. By steamrolling this legislation, Labor risks transforming Australia from a model of liberal democracy into a cautionary tale of executive overreach, where civil liberties are sacrificed on the altar of short-term political gains.

Nowhere is this hypocrisy more glaring than in the bill’s purported aim to protect vulnerable communities, particularly Australia’s Jewish population, from rising antisemitism and hate-fuelled rhetoric.

The legislation includes provisions to regulate online content and public discourse, framed as a shield against division in the wake of global conflicts like the Israel-Hamas war. But in their haste, Albanese and his ministers have largely ignored input from the Jewish community itself.

Prominent voices within Jewish organisations, including the Executive Council of Australian Jewry and local rabbis, have expressed concerns that the broad-brush approach could stifle legitimate debate, including pro-Israel advocacy or discussions on Middle East policy.

Rushing through measures meant to safeguard a community while sidelining their perspectives is nothing short of cynical opportunism. It’s as if the government is using the Jewish community’s pain as a pretext for broader controls on speech, all while claiming moral high ground.

This isn’t protection, it is paternalism wrapped in hypocrisy.

There has also been some speculation that elements of the hate speech and gun law reforms were ready to go some two years ago. If that is the case, then these laws have not been designed to protect against Islamic terrorism. Instead, it would seem that the Bondi massacre is being used as an opportunity for Labor to extend its radical illiberal agenda.

At its core, Labor’s actions are profoundly unAustralian. Our national ethos of a fair go, mateship, and a healthy scepticism of authority demands that leaders engage with the people, not dictate from on high.

Australians have always valued robust debate, even when it’s uncomfortable, as a cornerstone of our society. A good example of how to deal with any draft legislation which affects civil liberties can be found in the months-long debate of the ASIO Bill of 2002 which saw robust debate leading to amendments and compromises before it could become law.

By prioritising speed over substance, Labor is eroding these values, fostering a climate where dissent is viewed with suspicion rather than as a democratic virtue. This isn’t the leadership of a true-blue Australian, it’s the tactic of a politician more concerned with optics than outcomes.

As scholars of politics and international law, we call for the government to withdraw this omnibus bill, subject it to genuine parliamentary inquiry, and consult widely, including with those it claims to protect. Australia’s democratic legacy deserves better than a rushed power grab. Albanese must decide whether he will live up to the principles he demands of others or continue down a path that diminishes our nation’s standing as a free and fair society.

The Bondi massacre will define Mr Albanese’s prime ministership. But with all the bleating about religious texts that no doubt will be used against Jews and Christians, it may be too late to salvage Australia’s liberal democracy.

Dr Michael de Percy @FlaneurPolitiq is the Spectator Australia’s Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent. If you would like to support his writing, or read more of Michael, please visit his website.

Professor Sascha-Dominik (Dov) Bachmann @SdBachman is Professor in Law and Co-Convener National Security Hub, University of Canberra, and a Research Fellow with the Security Institute for Governance and Leadership in Africa, Faculty of Military Science, Stellenbosch University. Sascha is an extraordinary Reader in War Studies with the Swedish Defence University. He was a Fellow with NATO SHAPE – ACO Office of Legal Affairs until 2025 where he worked on Hybrid Threats and Lawfare. All views and opinions are the author’s own and do not represent the views of the organisations the author is affiliated with.