By Paul Gregoire and Ugur Nedim
The New South Wales government passed its second version of its ‘places of worship’ move on power for the NSW police toolkit in late November 2025, after the initial version was struck down by the Supreme Court in October 2025 on the basis it unjustifiably infringed the right of political communication that is implied into the Australian Constitution.
And while NSW attorney general Michael Daley claimed on introducing the updated law that it was never the intention of Labor to “prohibit or restrict lawful, peaceful protests that happen to be near places of worship”, that is exactly what it did.
Passed on 27 November 2025, the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Amendment (Places of Worship) Bill 2025, served to repeal the February-passed power, which was ripe for overreach in terms of its stated purpose as it permitted officers to move on protesters rallying nearby a church, mosque, synagogue or temple, even when they weren’t targeting worshippers or staff.
Prior to the Minns government’s second legislative attempt at providing police with a means of moving on demonstrators from the vicinity of a place of worship if their actions are obstructing those accessing such places or if they’re attempting to intimidate worshippers, the NSW Supreme Court determined that the original version of the move law was unconstitutional.
In his 18 November 2025 second reading speech on the bill, Daley explained that the new “exception to the limitation” to police move on powers in part 14 of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW) (LEPRA) has a stipulation that only those impacting worshipers or staff can be moved on, which the February passed law in the ‘Places of Worship Act’ failed to include.
Yet, while those behind the legal challenge to the places of worship move on power should be congratulated for rectifying the issue, the question remains why the NSW government passed a form of the move on power that had the ability to illegitimately criminalise rallies near churches that weren’t blocking or harassing congregants, even though its own members warned of this overreach.
The new places of worship move on power
Taking effect on 3 December 2025, the Places of Worship Amendment, firstly repealed subsection 200(5) from the LEPRA, which had contained the law that provided the originally-passed and court-struck down places of worship move on power and secondly, inserted new section 200AA into the LEPRA, which contains its replacement, or the “directions in relation to places of worship” law.
Part 14 of the LEPRA contains the move on powers the NSW Police Force has available to it. Section 197 of the LEPRA allows officers to move on civilians from an area if they are obstructing people or traffic, harassing people or trying to supply or obtain illegal drugs, while section 198 allows police to move on people from a place if they are intoxicated by drugs or alcohol for up to 6 hours.
New subsection 200AA(1) includes a stipulation relating to officers being able to issue a move on to “a demonstration, protest, procession or assembly” if firstly, it’s in or near a place of worship, as per the meaning in section 214B of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), which states such a place is a “building or other structure ordinarily used for worship”, including a “church, mosque, synagogue or temple”.
The second stipulation triggering the power to move on a rally near a building or other structure ordinarily used for worship is if it is involved in any of the following, “intentionally blocking, impeding or hindering a person” or “harassing, intimidating or threatening a person” who is either “accessing or leaving, or attempting to access or leave” a place of worship.
However, a police officer is not authorised to apply the places of worship move on power if an assembly has been authorised by NSW police, via the Form 1 process contained in part 4 of the Summary Offences Act 1988 (NSW) or if the person in charge of the place of worship, has authorised the demonstration.
The third stipulation in terms of an exception to a place of worship move on power is that it cannot be applied if the rally in question is being held before NSW state parliament or the office of a member of NSW parliament, or if it is part of an “industrial action or an industrial dispute or campaign”.
Finally subsection 200AA(f) of the LEPRA states that the places of worship move on power can only be issued to those “intentionally blocking, impeding or hindering a person accessing or leaving, or attempting to access or leave, the place of worship, or harassing, intimidating or threatening a person accessing or leaving, or attempting to access or leave, the place of worship”.
Those refusing such a direction from a NSW police officer are then subject to the imposition of a fine of $220 for failure to comply with a move on direction, as per section 199 of the LEPRA.
The dodgy law that had applied
Passed on 21 February and taking effect on 3 June 2025, the Places of Worship Act served two purposes: to create a new criminal offence in the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), which pertained to the obstruction of places of worship, and it inserted the original places of worship move on power under subsection 200(5) of the LEPRA.
Just like the current places of worship move on power, the original too applied to assemblies that are happening near a place of worship in line with the clauses in section 214B of the Crimes Act but have not been authorised via the Form 1 process.
The subsection further noted that the original places of worship move on power did not apply to industrial actions, or rallies before parliament or a NSW MP’s office or assembles of which the NSW police commissioner or a person in charge of the place of worship had authorised.
What was missing from the originally passed move on power was there was no stipulation included that those being blocked, impeded or hindered, or harassed, intimidated or threatened by an assembly happening near a place of worship, actually had to be the individuals trying to access or leave a place or worship, and not any passerby on the street at the time of the event.
That this issue with the law had been raised prior to its initial passing and it was still enacted in that form suggests an attempt by the NSW chief lawmaker office’s to have such illegitimate overreach in operation, or that the drafters working on the original law had absentmindedly failed to ensure the move on power explicitly applied to those impacting people related to a place of worship.
The places of worship offence
The Places of Worship Act created the criminal offence of obstructing a place of worship, which applies to a person at or near a place of worship, who intentionally blocks, impedes, hinders, harasses, intimidates or threatens a person accessing or leaving, or attempting to access or leave, a place of worship, “without a reasonable excuse”.
An individual who is found guilty of this offence is liable to up to 2 years imprisonment and/or a fine of up to $2,200.
This law does not apply when the individual is involved in an industrial action or one that takes place at NSW parliament or before an MP’s office, as well as when the NSW police commissioner or the person in charge of the place of worship has authorised the demonstration.
Moving on
That Palestine Action Group organiser Josh Lees had to lodge a legal action against the legitimacy of the original places of worship move on power in order to see it removed, appears to show that civil society is having to step in and play the role of a yet-to-be-enacted Human Rights Act for NSW, in respect of preventing the passing of dodgy laws in NSW parliament.
In terms of the impact of the original places of worship move on power, there has been speculation that the vicious police assault allegedly perpetrated against legal observer Hannah Thomas by NSW police senior constable Christopher Davis in June this year, was due to the fact that the officer was trying to apply the since repealed illegitimate aspects of the places of worship move on power.
As NSW attorney general Daley explained in parliament last month, “When assessing whether a law impermissibly burdens the implied freedom of political communication” in the Australian Constitution, the court considers three questions, which include whether it encroaches freedoms, is compatible with representative and responsible government, and whether it acts in a legitimate way.
The NSW Supreme Court, however, found that the original February-passed places of worship move on power failed all three constitutional questions, so it was necessarily struck out.
Main Image: Refugee Action protest at St David’s Uniting Church Oakleigh Refugee on 27 July 2013 in Melbourne by Takver is licensed under CC BY SA 2.0
