The demand for a royal commission to investigate the tragic massacre of Jews during the annual Chabad Hanukkah celebration at Bondi Beach on December 14 is an understandable response to the horrific event that claimed 15 lives and injured 40 others. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s announcement of the commission’s establishment has been welcomed, but its success hinges on the terms of reference and the implementation of its recommendations.
The establishment of a royal commission raises questions about its expected outcomes: truth, justice, or perhaps more. Reflecting on past commissions offers valuable insights into what might be expected. From 1989 to 1990, the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody produced 339 recommendations, including Recommendation 92, advocating imprisonment as a last resort, and Recommendation 122, which emphasized a rigorous duty of care for law enforcement and correctional officers.
Lessons from Past Commissions
The failure to legislate many of these recommendations immediately was a significant oversight. Since the commission’s report in 1991, over 600 Indigenous Australians have died in custody, emphasizing the need for prompt legislative action. The royal commission process is often lengthy, with recommendations considered by future governments, as seen in the case of Aboriginal deaths in custody.
Three-and-a-half decades later, the lack of implementation of key recommendations is evident. The massacre at Bondi Beach, driven by malignant ideology and hatred, follows years of rising anti-Semitism and warnings from the Jewish community. Accusations of the prime minister’s slow response to anti-Semitism have surfaced, highlighting the urgency for action.
Background of Rising Anti-Semitism
The Jewish community’s suffering is undeniable. Prior to the attack, there were numerous firebombings of Jewish buildings, including a synagogue being burnt down and others targeted. Jewish schools faced vandalism, and businesses were defaced, with reports of anti-Semitic violence escalating.
Intelligence failures related to the Bondi attack are apparent. One of the alleged gunmen had been on a “known entity management list” since 2021, yet his accomplice obtained a gun license in 2023. The politicization of the massacre and lack of bipartisanship have been criticized, with media outlets highlighting calls for a royal commission.
“Only a Commonwealth royal commission can unpack the dynamics of Jew hatred, including aspects such as the social media threat, how hate and incitement is weaponized in Australia and how we can come together across the nation to defeat it,” wrote former Labor politicians to the prime minister.
Government Response and Measures
On December 21, a week after the attack, the prime minister announced an independent review of Australia’s federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies, led by Dennis Richardson. This review will inform the royal commission. The government’s immediate response included strengthening gun laws, with national cabinet discussions focusing on citizenship requirements for firearm licenses, accelerating the National Firearms Register, and limiting firearm ownership.
Following the Port Arthur massacre precedent, a national gun buyback scheme was announced. New South Wales Premier Chris Minns and Attorney-General Michael Daley introduced measures to ban symbols of Islamic terrorist organizations and potential bans on hateful slogans. Albanese proposed similar measures to fortify hate speech laws.
Challenges and Considerations
Despite swift actions, some advocates argue that the government, not extremist groups, is the true adversary. This perspective raises questions about additional measures beyond those already implemented, such as stricter bail conditions and longer sentences for terrorist-related crimes.
The sub judice principle, which restricts public discussion of ongoing judicial cases, poses a challenge for the royal commission. The surviving alleged gunman faces 57 charges, and the principle ensures fair trials by preventing external influences. This is crucial in high-profile cases, where media attention is intense.
“The sub judice principle remains crucial to ensuring fair trials, particularly in high-profile criminal and terrorist cases where public interest and media attention are intense,” noted a legal expert.
Future Implications and Expectations
The royal commission’s terms of reference are crucial, exploring anti-Semitism’s nature and prevalence, and its key drivers in Australia. Former High Court judge Virginia Bell will make recommendations to law enforcement, border control, immigration, and security agencies, aiming to strengthen social cohesion and counter extremism.
While expectations for the royal commission should be tempered, the focus must remain on implementing effective policies to prevent future attacks and foster a united society. Definitions of anti-Semitism, anti-Zionism crossing into hate speech, and hate speech against any race or religion can be legislated promptly. Anything less would be a disservice to the Bondi Beach victims and the nation.
A royal commission into the Bondi massacre, security agency failures, and rising anti-Semitism is necessary. Its recommendations must be acted upon to ensure meaningful change and justice for the victims.
