NSW Court of Appeal overturns post‑Bondi protest restrictions after challenge involving Blak Caucus

Key parts of NSW’s post-terror attack protest restrictions have been struck down by the NSW Court of Appeal, in a decision that activists say restores an essential democratic safeguard for communities (including First Nations groups) who rely on public assembly to demand accountability and change.

In Jarrett v State of New South Wales, the Court of Appeal found the state’s “public assembly restriction declaration” (PARD) scheme was invalid because it impermissibly burdened the implied constitutional freedom of political communication. The PARD powers were introduced through the Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2025 after the Bondi Beach terrorist attack on 14 December 2025.

They allowed the Police Commissioner to make a declaration restricting public assemblies in a designated area, with the effect that organisers could not seek authorisation under the long-standing Summary Offences Act process that ordinarily manages protests through notice and conditions.

The challenge was brought by three activist groups (Palestine Action Group, Blak Caucus and Jews Against the Occupation ’48) with individual plaintiffs Elizabeth Jarrett, Joshua Lees and Paul Silva.

Amnesty International Australia welcomed the ruling and credited the plaintiffs for pursuing the challenge. Amnesty spokesperson Mohamed Duar said the decision was “a testament to people power and collective action” and warned against rushed laws that “crackdown on fundamental rights”.

The judgment details how authorised assemblies under the Summary Offences Act can provide practical protections (for example, by disapplying certain offences that might otherwise be triggered by a march) while allowing police and, if necessary, the Supreme Court to assess and respond to the characteristics of a specific proposed protest. The Court found the PARD mechanism cut across that balancing process by defaulting assemblies in the declared area to being unauthorised.

For First Nations activists, the decision has particular resonance. Blak Caucus was among the groups behind the case, in an environment where public protest has long been used to press for action on issues such as deaths in custody, child removals, cultural heritage and treaty processes.

The ruling is also likely to be watched beyond NSW, as governments around the country have introduced or expanded protest-related powers in recent years. Amnesty urged states with similar laws to repeal them and instead protect the right to protest.

While the judgment deals with a specific legislative scheme tied to terrorism powers, its core message is broader: measures that restrict political protest must be carefully justified, narrowly tailored and compatible with Australia’s system of representative government.