The Australian pastor that was sued under the country’s equivalent to the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill, has commented that the UK’s religious hatred laws would be an extremist’s charter, and far more damaging than in Australia.

|PIC1|Pastor Danny Nalliah, a leading Australian Christian, was previously sued successfully under a religious hatred law similar to the one being proposed in the UK. The pastor will be coming to the UK in February.

At a private seminar in Australia, the President of Catch the Fire Ministries, was called to consider the impact of Islam. He quoted various parts of the Koran to show what many Muslims believe, but was found of inciting religious hatred by carrying out the act.

In the UK, evangelicals have been leading the fight against the government’s proposed Racial and Religious Hatred Bill, uniting with leading legal experts, as well as other freedom of speech supporters, comedians and even secularists. The major concern is that the proposed law could restrict any critical discussion of other faiths, and may even be a bar to preaching.

In Australia, the following was released in a news report from CBN on Pastor Danny Nalliah’s case:

Two Pastors in Australia face sentencing for speaking out about Islam. In Western nations hate speech laws are being enacted and used to protect religious minorities. But often these laws are being used to punish Christians for sharing their faith. Pastor Danny Nalliah says the seminar featured a comparison of verses from the Bible with verses from the Koran. The complainants said they especially felt vilified by a discussion concerning jihad-or holy war. Nalliah said, "Our question to the judge was, 'Your Honour, how can I vilify a Muslim when I read from his own text'?" Then, the barrister reminded the judge, 'Your Honour, truth is not a defence in this law.'

|QUOTE|The British government has proposed the new legislation to target extremists, and to stop them preaching or inciting hate. However, many Christians, and even famous celebrities such as Rowan Atkinson have publicly denounced the Bill as being too widely drafted, effectively meaning that many innocent incidents will be caught by the law.

The case of Nalliah in Australia has been used as a clear example of what may happen, as the similar law in Australia allowed him to be sued for holding a private meeting to discuss their concerns regarding religious extremism.

Christian groups CARE, the Evangelical Alliance, the Lawyer’s Christian Fellowship, the Christian Institute, Open Doors, The Barnabus Fund, Christian Solidarity Worldwide and Premier Radio have all proclaimed their opposition to the legislation as it stands.

One of the core differences between the law in Australia and the one being proposed in Britain, is that the British one will carry a maximum seven-year punishment for anyone found guilty of an offence. Therefore, it is a concern that instead of blocking extremism the law could become an extremists' charter, giving legal power to the intolerant who are offended by a simple religious message.

Another criticism held by many Christian groups has been that under the new law, it will not be an offence to say that there was no intent, and certainly it will not be an argument to say that what was said is true.

|AD|The Lawyers' Christian Fellowship has issued the warning: “If the Lords approve the Bill, freedom to preach the full gospel of Jesus Christ may be significantly curbed for years to come.”

The Head of Public Affairs at the Evangelical Alliance, Dr Don Horrocks said, “Our previous relative relief that the Lords had delivered a workable and less extreme Bill that still met the Labour Government’s manifesto commitment to criminalise incitement to religious hatred has now turned to alarm.

“The fact is that unless all the opposition parties and significant numbers of Labour MPs vote against the Government’s insistence that it will reintroduce its original proposals, under the guise of major concessions, we are likely to see the onset of an era in which freedom of speech and good relationships between religions will be threatened.”

He continued, “If the Government’s version of the Bill goes through, whatever it says about proof of intent or recklessness being necessary for prosecution for incitement to religious hatred, the practical effect will be to inhibit free speech and writing in such a way that people will worry about saying anything critical of religion. This goes way beyond what the Lords deemed appropriate for a sensible balance between inciteful behaviour and civil liberties.”

In October 2005, the Evangelical Alliance and CARE, the Christian social concern charity, celebrated following the defeat of the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill in the House of Lords Oct. 25th. Christians, religious groups as well as comedians also rejoiced as the government’s proposed Racial and Religious Hatred Bill was overwhelmingly defeated.

House of Lords’ peers voted by a majority of 149 to support a cross-bench move to implement freedom of speech safeguards into the proposals.

Speaking after the vote in favour of an amendment by Lord Lester, R. David Muir, Director of Public Policy at the Evangelical Alliance said, “Peers have done the only sensible thing with this legislation and forced the Government to rethink its position. The strength of opposition to this Bill in the House of Lords is a timely reminder to ministers of the importance this country places on free speech.”

The Evangelical Alliance and the ACEA is now encouraging all people that wish to preserve the right of freedom of speech to contact their MP before Tuesday Jan. 31st, as a matter of “great urgency”.

The Alliances have also organised a rally for those committed to preserving free speech in Jan 31st from 1pm to 4pm at Old Palace Yard in London.