The New South Wales government is advancing proposals to ban the public use of the slogan “globalise the intifada” amid an intensified campaign against hate speech and extremist rhetoric following the deadly Bondi Beach terror attack that killed fifteen people.

The Premier, Chris Minns, has repeatedly characterized the chant as incitement and a form of hate speech that encourages violence in the community, asserting that it should be classified alongside banned symbols and slogans under new state laws.

This announcement comes as part of a suite of legal reforms aimed at strengthening protections against hatred and intimidation.

The proposal, initially flagged by the government last December, would make it an offence to publicly chant or display the phrase “globalise the intifada,” which has been used by some protest movements internationally.

Authorities in New South Wales are seeking to include it on a list of prohibited rhetoric alongside extremist insignia such as Islamic State group flags, with penalties ranging from fines to potential imprisonment.

The move follows similar measures in other countries where law enforcement has responded to inflammatory slogans that authorities believe pose a risk to public safety and community cohesion.

The state’s parliamentary inquiry into measures to prohibit slogans that incite hatred is also considering whether the wording should be explicitly proscribed under hate speech laws, with a final report expected by the end of January.

Members of the Jewish community and other advocacy groups have pressed for decisive action, arguing that certain chants and slogans have been linked to real-world violence and intimidation against Jewish Australians.

Supporters of the proposed ban say it sends a clear message that hate-fueled rhetoric will not be tolerated in public life.

However, the proposal has sparked debate about how best to balance protections against hate with fundamental freedoms of expression.

Legal experts and civil liberties advocates have cautioned that criminalising specific phrases may raise complex constitutional issues, particularly in a country with strong protections for political communication.

Submissions from diverse community organisations, including Muslim and pro-Palestinian groups, argue that broad bans on particular slogans risk disproportionately affecting minority Australians and stifling legitimate political discourse.

The inquiry’s outcome will inform whether the recommendations translate into specific legislation when the state parliament reconvenes.