The Offence of Knowingly Display Nazi Symbol | Astor Legal

Request callback





    Articles

    Get A Free Case EvaluationHave a legal issue?

    Submit your inquiry to speak to a Senior Lawyer






      knowingly display nazi symbol

      The Offence of Knowingly Display Nazi Symbol

      The offence of knowingly displaying Nazi symbol in public without a reasonable excuse is contained in Section 93ZA of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW).

      Astor Legal are the only firm in Australia who have successfully defended against these charges.

      Contact us online or call us on (02) 7804 2823 if you have been charged with a similar offence.

      What the prosecution must prove

      The elements that the prosecution must prove for an offence of knowingly display Nazi symbol under section 93ZA of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) for displaying Nazi symbols are as follows:

      1. The person displays a Nazi symbol.
      2. The display occurs through a public act (as defined in section 93Z, e.g., any act observable by the public, including social media posts accessible by the public).
      3. The person acts knowingly.
      4. The display is without a reasonable excuse.

      The following are explicitly excluded from constituting a reasonable excuse:

      • Displaying a swastika in connection with Buddhism, Hinduism, or Jainism.
      • For an academic, artistic, or educational purpose.
      • For another purpose in the public interest.

      What is a ‘public act’?

      According to section 93Z of the Crimes Act outlines that a “public act” includes the following:

      • Any form of communication to the public, such as speaking, writing, displaying notices, playing recorded material, broadcasting, or using social media and other electronic methods.
      • Any behavior visible to the public, including actions, gestures, or the wearing or display of clothing, signs, flags, emblems, or insignia.
      • The distribution or sharing of any material with the public.

      An act can be considered a public act even if it takes place on private property.

      Defences to knowingly display Nazi symbol

      Defences to the offence of knowingly displaying a Nazi symbol include:

      • Displaying the swastika in connection with the Buddhist, Hindu, or Jain faiths. In these traditions, the swastika is a horizontal symbol of peace with origins dating back tens of thousands of years, distinct from the Nazi Hakenkreuz, or hooked cross, which is associated with evil or nazism.
      • Reasonable excuse: Nazi symbols can be displayed in “good faith” for purposes such as academic, artistic, or educational activities, or for other purposes deemed in the public interest. This provision acknowledges legitimate contexts where such displays may serve broader societal or educational goals.
      • Duress: You were forced to commit the offence
      • Necessity: Your actions were necessary in the circumstances

      Penalty for knowingly display Nazi symbol

      The maximum penalty for an individual who knowingly displays a Nazi symbol is 12 months imprisonment or 100 penalty units ($11,000) or both.

      Why was the law introduced?

      The law against knowingly displaying Nazi symbols was introduced in response to a concerning rise in neo-Nazi activity and far-right extremism, exacerbated by the spread of conspiracy theories and the amplification of such ideologies through social media, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic.

      Former NSW shadow counterterrorism minister Walt Secord highlighted this growing issue, citing 31 incidents of publicly displayed Nazi symbols in NSW between June 2018 and April 2020, alongside 331 antisemitic incidents logged nationwide from October 2019 to September 2020.

      Security agencies also noted a sharp increase in far-right extremist activity. In October 2020, ASIO chief Mike Burgess reported that 30–40 percent of ASIO’s workload involved monitoring far-right extremism. Similarly, the AFP’s Joint Terrorism Team revealed a 750 percent rise in white supremacist cases over the prior 18 months. NSW police commissioner Mick Fuller also observed that far-right extremism had been escalating over the past five years, accounting for 20 percent of his force’s counterterrorism focus, with a significant surge during the pandemic.

      The introduction of this law reflects the government’s recognition of the growing threat posed by far-right extremism and its commitment to combating hate speech and antisemitism in the community.

      Avinash Singh

      Avinash Singh

      Avinash Singh is the principal lawyer for Astor Legal and is one of Australia's most respected and highly sought-after lawyers. He has been recognised by the Law Society as an Accredited Specialist in Criminal Law, placing him in the top 6% of Australian lawyers.

      Comments are closed.