The NSW Government has decided not to expand the state’s criminal offence of intentionally inciting racial hatred to cover additional protected characteristics, rejecting a central recommendation of an independent review led by former Supreme Court judge John Sackar AM KC.
The government released its response on 4 August 2026, saying a broader criminal offence would raise difficult questions involving freedom of expression, religious freedom and the consistent application of criminal law.
The existing racial hatred offence will therefore remain unchanged for now.
However, the government has not rejected the Sackar Review in full. It says the remaining recommendations are still being considered alongside other state and national reviews.
Government rejects broader criminal protection
The Sackar Review examined whether NSW criminal law provided sufficient protection against the incitement of hatred towards vulnerable communities.
It was commissioned after Parliament passed the Crimes Amendment (Inciting Racial Hatred) Act 2025, which created a specific offence targeting the intentional incitement of hatred on racial grounds.
The review’s terms of reference required Mr Sackar to consider:
- Whether existing criminal protections were sufficient
- Whether improvements were needed for vulnerable groups
- How stronger protections would interact with political communication and religious freedom
- Other criminal law reforms that could support social cohesion
The review received submissions from legal bodies, civil-liberties groups, religious organisations, multicultural communities, LGBTQIA+ organisations and disability advocates.
Mr Sackar reportedly recommended that the newer racial-hatred offence be expanded to cover the same attributes already recognised under other NSW vilification laws.
These would include characteristics such as religion, homosexuality, transgender status and HIV/AIDS status.
The government has rejected that proposed expansion.
Concerns about expression and religious freedom
The NSW Government said criminal offences must be clear, workable and capable of being applied consistently, regardless of the identity or beliefs of the people involved.
It argued that extending the offence beyond race could create competing claims involving identity, religious doctrine, political debate and freedom of expression.
The government did not publish a detailed legal analysis explaining precisely how each additional attribute would create an unacceptable risk.
It instead stated that, after considering the report, it did not support expanding the existing racial-hatred offence.
The decision means conduct directed at another protected group will not automatically attract the same criminal provision that currently applies to intentional racial hatred.
Different protections remain under NSW law
The decision does not mean hatred or vilification based on religion, sexuality or gender identity is entirely lawful in NSW.
The Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 contains civil protections against vilification based on:
- Race
- Transgender status
- Homosexuality
- Religious belief, affiliation or activity
- The absence of religious belief
- HIV/AIDS status
Unlike the criminal racial-hatred offence, these provisions generally operate through complaints to Anti-Discrimination NSW, conciliation and possible proceedings before the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal.
They do not ordinarily result in criminal prosecution or imprisonment.
NSW also maintains separate criminal offences and aggravated sentencing provisions dealing with threats, violence, intimidation, Nazi symbols and other extremist conduct.
The government recently passed further laws targeting public conduct expressing support for Nazi ideology and giving police additional identity and removal powers in relation to suspected Nazi symbols.
Review warned against unequal protection
Public reporting on the Sackar Review indicates that it questioned whether protecting race through a specific criminal offence, while leaving other vulnerable groups under different legal frameworks, created a two-tier system.
Mr Sackar reportedly considered it difficult to dispute the principle that vulnerable groups should receive equal treatment under the criminal law.
The review argued that inconsistent coverage could leave some communities without equivalent protection and contribute to perceptions that the law valued hostility against one group more seriously than hostility against another.
The government’s response does not directly accept that reasoning.
Instead, it gives greater weight to the difficulties of drafting and consistently enforcing a broader criminal offence.
Remaining recommendations still under consideration
The government has not issued a final response to every recommendation in the Sackar Review.
It confirmed that work will continue with the Australian Government on a National Hate Crimes Database, responding to the review’s first recommendation.
A national database could improve the consistency of information about hate crimes reported across different jurisdictions and help authorities identify patterns affecting particular communities.
NSW Police will also consider recommendations directed to policing and continue working with community organisations through its Engagement and Hate Crimes Unit.
The government has not announced a deadline for completing its consideration of the remaining recommendations.
Other reviews may shape future reforms
Further decisions will be informed by the Royal Commission into Antisemitism and Social Cohesion and the NSW Law Reform Commission’s broader review of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977.
The Law Reform Commission is currently considering whether the Act should be modernised and simplified, including its coverage, complaint processes, remedies and compliance mechanisms.
Its latest consultation period remains open until 2 October 2026.
This means NSW may still change its civil vilification and anti-discrimination framework, even though the government has rejected the immediate expansion of the criminal incitement offence.
Any future criminal-law amendment would require new legislation and parliamentary approval.
Report followed months of government consideration
Mr Sackar delivered the review to the Attorney General on 5 November 2025.
The government spent approximately nine months considering the report before releasing its formal response in August 2026.
During that period, members of Parliament and community organisations called for the report to be made public and questioned why it had not been released earlier.
The government said it needed to consider the review in the context of subsequent extremist incidents and other policy developments.
Its latest response settles the main question about expanding the racial-hatred offence but leaves several other recommendations unresolved.
Current criminal offence remains limited to race
The practical effect of the decision is that the specific offence of intentionally inciting racial hatred will continue to apply only to race.
Other conduct may still be investigated or prosecuted under separate laws where it involves threats, intimidation, violence, property damage, Nazi conduct or another existing offence.
Civil vilification complaints may also remain available for some protected characteristics.
The government’s position should therefore not be described as abandoning all protections against religious, sexuality-based or gender-identity hatred.
More precisely, it has chosen not to give those attributes equivalent coverage under the particular criminal incitement offence created in 2025.
The remaining policy debate will focus on whether the combination of civil protections, general criminal offences and targeted extremist laws provides sufficient and equal protection across NSW.
Be the first to comment