NSW Court Blocks Planned Pro-Palestinian March to the Opera House
The highest court in New South Wales has granted a prohibition order against a planned pro-Palestinian rally that would have culminated at the Sydney Opera House forecourt. The Court of Appeal ruled that police concerns about public safety outweighed the event’s political significance, effectively barring the demonstration on Sunday.
What Was Planned and Why The Court Intervened
Organisers from the Palestine Action Group (PAG) anticipated as many as 40,000 participants, with speeches in Hyde Park before the crowd marched toward the Opera House forecourt. The PAG proposed a split into smaller processions to mitigate crowd density and suggested dispersal once at the forecourt. Police, however, argued that even a staggered approach posed unacceptable risks due to limited exit points and the potential for a deadly crowd crush.
The Court’s Ruling and Its Legal Consequences
Justice Stephen Free, delivering the court’s summary, stated that the public-safety risk was extreme and could not be justified by the event’s political importance or the participants’ freedoms. The decision confirms that a prohibition order does more than deprive attendees of certain legal immunities; it clarifies that the order is, in effect, a prohibition on holding the public assembly itself.
Implications for Attendees
Under the prohibition, individuals who participate in the assembly could face legal consequences beyond ordinary protest rights. The court rejected arguments that breaching such orders would not amount to contempt of court, signaling a strict enforcement stance on prohibitions of this kind.
Police Safety Concerns and Practical Challenges
Assistant Commissioner Peter McKenna underscored the practical danger, pointing to crowded conditions that could overwhelm emergency routes and impede ambulance access. He noted that even with “altruism” and marshals, crowd numbers could exceed the Opera House forecourt’s capacity, risking a crisis similar to the tragic Hillsborough disaster cited by the judges.
Organisers and Their Response
The PAG and associated groups argued that protests are a potent form of political expression and that risk could be mitigated with protective measures. Barrister Felicity Graham highlighted past protests as cooperative and compliant. However, the court’s decision remained firm, emphasizing that timing and safety considerations must prevail when public assemblies threaten significant danger.
Event Management and Opera House Involvement
The Opera House’s management did not receive formal notification of the rally, though acting chief executive Jade McKellar confirmed that, as with other large gatherings, security checks and police guidance would govern access. The Opera House operates under by-laws that restrict demonstrations, complicating the legal and logistical landscape for any planned march to its forecourt.
Community and Political Context
Following the ruling, the PAG expressed disappointment, noting a negotiated alternative route from Hyde Park through George Street to Belmore Park. Community leaders for Jewish groups welcomed the decision, stressing concerns about safety and a sense of relief after persistent tensions surrounding pro-Palestinian protests in Australia.
Looking Ahead
While organizers have signaled they will not proceed with the Opera House march, the case reinforces how NSW courts balance freedom of political expression against the imperative to protect public safety. The ruling also clarifies the legal contours of prohibition orders, signaling to future protesters the potential consequences of circumventing such orders.
As Sydney continues to navigate complex conversations about protest, safety, and civil liberties, authorities and activists alike will closely monitor future demonstrations for how they are planned, policed, and legally interpreted.
