澳華社區議會維州分會發言人表示，聯邦政府修訂種族歧視法的計劃是“災難性的”。
總檢察長喬治•布蘭迪斯計劃對種族歧視法進行修訂的具體改動草稿近日被洩露出來，為解讀法案修改可能造成的影響，眾多多元文化社團紛紛舉辦社區論壇。在4月11日由世界華人體育聯合總會舉辦的《反對種族歧視法修改意見社區聯合論壇》上，澳華社區議會維州分會代理主席黃碧瑤博士發表了對政府修訂該法律計劃的強烈批評。
黃博士從四個方面抨擊了修訂該法可能導致的負面影響：國際地位，經濟後果，法律不穩和社會動亂。
“在崇尚包容的澳大利亞社會，支持多元化、人人平等及民主的政策，已成為塑造我們身份的公民價值觀。實踐證明現有法案行之有效，改變法律將造成不可估量的負面影響及允許打著言論自由旗號進行的種族主義和攻擊行為。冒著這些風險修改法律是說不過去的。”
“澳大利亞的國際地位將受到影響，我們還可能會面臨違反聯合國消除一切形式種族歧視公約（ ICERD ）的風險。”
黃博士還說明了修改該法對經濟的嚴重影響， “諸如國際學生、外貿、旅遊、商業及技術移民，貨物服務出口以及吸引傑出人才等各各方面都存在著巨大的隱患，更何況由此引起的就業流失。”
在2009至2010年間發生的一系列襲擊事件後，印度學生人數下降了46 ％。這就是一個值得引以為鑑的例子。學生流失給澳大利亞造成了約十七億元的財政收入損失。 2010年時，印度學生聯合會聲明， “種族攻擊是學生流失背後的主要原因之一。 ”
在法律方面，本次修訂宣稱旨在保護言論自由。但言論自由已經受到了一系列針對誹謗、褻瀆、版權、淫穢、煽動、保密、蔑視法庭及議會、審查和煽動等方面相關法律的保護。但政府為什麼決定以言論自由的名義單單對反種族主義法進行修訂？
允許種族誹謗和恐嚇在例如報紙、書籍一類的平面媒體刊登並通過如廣播、電視和互聯網一類的音頻和視覺手段傳播只會導致社會混亂。修訂該法，讓“可能”的誹謗攻擊僅僅適用於占主導地位的主流白人社會。這樣的標準只會分化社會並毀滅所有白澳政策結束以來形成的種族寬容及多元化的社會價值觀。
“請要馬上行動，響亮而清晰的傳達我們的呼聲。”你可以發送電子郵件給政府郵箱：
[email protected]
,或寄信到
Human Rights Policy Branch Attorney General’s Department 3-5 National Circuit BARTON ACT 2600
信件不需要詞彙嚴謹，可以只是一個手寫的便條，最重要的是能夠表達你個人的關注。如果你英文有限，信件可以用中文寫作。如果你不知道信件內容該怎麼寫，最簡單的方法就是登錄到我們的網站cccavic.org.au下載說明。在這個特殊的時刻，我們懇請你，用最有效的合法方式將你的聲音傳達給政府。 ”
黃博士認為，我們也應該從積極的方面看待這一令人不安的修訂。正因為這個修訂計劃，無數社區的人們能夠為了共同的目標團結在了一起，發出共同的呼聲。因此也真正體現了民主的真諦。
Chinese Community Council of Australia, Victorian Chapter (CCCAV) strongly opposes the Federal government’s proposed amendment to the Racial Discrimination Act.
Dr. Anne Pang, the Acting President of CCCAV said “there are four main areas of concern in the amendments, namely Australia’s international standing, economic ramifications, legal inconsistencies and social disorder.”
“Policies that support diversity, equality of all peoples and democracy have become civic values that shape the Australian identity.”
“Changing the Act at the risk of immeasurable negative impact and allowing episodes of racism and bigotry to prevail in the name of freedom of speech is not justified.”
The proposed changes open doors for racial insults and Australia’s international standing will be undermined to the extent where there is the risk of potentially breaching obligations under the UN International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD).
After a number of race related incidents in 2009 towards Indian international students, there was a 46% drop in the number of Indian students. This translates into almost $1.7 billion loss of revenue.
Dr Anne Pang said “increasing in race related incidents and offences can negatively impact our economy through loss in the number of international students, foreign trade, tourism, business and skilled migration, export of goods and services and the loss of human talents, not to mention the associated job losses for us Australians.”
On the legal front, the amendments purport to protect freedom of speech, yet there are a number of other laws governing defamation, blasphemy, copyright, obscenity, incitement, official secrecy, contempt of court and of Parliament, censorship and sedition which also affect this freedom. All of these laws recognise that some things are more important than freedom of speech.
If “freedom of speech” is the argument, should all abovementioned legislations that restrict “freedom of speech” be appealed? Why is ONLY the anti-racism act being amended in the name of freedom of speech?
The Federal Government must come clean on the real reasons for only repealing the Race Discrimination Act. The community certainly does NOT support the amendments.
CCCAV is a peak advocacy body and represents over thirty Chinese community groups.
