A Sydney Islamic cleric being sued in the federal court for alleged racial discrimination of Jewish people has described his case as an existential battle “between Islam and unbelievers”.
Wissam Haddad, also known as Abu Ousayd, is being sued by Australia’s peak Jewish body over a series of lectures he gave in November 2023, in which he is alleged to have maligned Jewish people as “vile”, “treacherous” and cowardly.
The lectures quoted ayat and hadith from the Qur’an about Jews in Medina in the 7th century and, the federal court claim alleges, made derogatory generalisations about Jewish people, including that they are “wicked and scheming” and “love wealth”.
The claim, brought by the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, alleges Haddad breached section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act – prohibiting offensive behaviour based on race or ethnic origin – during the sermons delivered at the Al Madina Dawah Centre (AMDC) in Bankstown in November 2023, speeches subsequently broadcast online.
But, Haddad’s defence case argues, his sermons were delivered in “good faith” as religious and historical instruction. If his sermons are found to breach 18C, then, he argues, the law is unconstitutional because it restricts the free exercise of religion.
On Tuesday morning, the long-running dispute, which failed to find resolution at conciliation, comes before Justice Angus Stewart in the federal court, in a case set to test the limits of religious expression and hate speech under Australian law.
The court is likely to be asked to adjudicate whether Haddad’s sermons, in which he quotes the Qur’an and offers interpretation of it, amount to incitement or are protected religious expression.
Ahead of the trial, Haddad, argued on Instagram that the case was existential for the practice of Islam in Australia.
“What I am currently facing in the federal court is not an issue of Abu Ousayd or Al Madina Dawah Centre versus the Jewish lobby … rather, it’s a battle between Islam and kuffar,” he said, using an Arabic word, usually translated as “unbelievers”.
He said the claim against him sought to criminalise Islamic scripture.
“They wish to take and make those ayat and hadith and historic accounts that speak about the Jews: to what they see as insulting, they seek to make it criminal.”
Ayat are verses in the Qur’an, the Islamic holy book, while hadith are reports attributed to the Prophet Muhammad.
Two prominent members of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, Peter Wertheim and Robert Goot, have sought an injunction from the court ordering the speeches still online be removed, and banning Haddad and his centre from publishing similar content online in the future.
The ECAJ claim has also asked the court to order Haddad’s centre to publish a “corrective notice” on its social media pages. It has applied for the cost of its legal action to be covered, but it has not sought damages or compensation.
In a statement, Wertheim said the ECAJ had attempted “in good faith” to resolve the matter by conciliation through the Australian Human Rights Commission, but that attempts to broker a resolution failed.
He said the ECAJ took the matter to court “to defend the honour of our community, and as a warning to deter others seeking to mobilise racism in order to promote their political views”.
“We are all free to observe our faith and traditions within the bounds of Australian law, and that should mean we do not bring the hatreds, prejudices and bigotry of overseas conflicts and societies into Australia.”
In his defence documents, Haddad argues his lectures “were not reasonably likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate Jewish people in Australia” given their context and audience.
He said his sermons were delivered in “good faith” and “for the genuine purpose of … delivering religious historical and educational lectures … to congregants of the AMDC”.
He said he had given some of the addresses in response to requests from the Islamic community “to provide sermons which address the Gaza War, and engaging in political commentary on the Gaza War from a religious perspective”.
However, his defence states, if the court finds his sermons have breached section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, he argues the law is unconstitutional under section 116 of the constitution, which protects the “free exercise of any religion”.
Both Haddad and the ECAJ will rely on lay witnesses and expert testimony in the week-long court case. The ECAJ has enlisted professor of theology at Notre Dame University, Gabriel Reynolds; Haddad will call Sheikh Adel Ibrahim from the Greenacre Prayers Hall in Sydney to give evidence.
Haddad has never been charged with any terrorism-related offences, but has previously boasted of his friendship with Australian Islamic State fighters Khaled Sharrouf and Mohamed Elomar, and Briton Anjem Choudary, an extremist preacher jailed for life in the UK last year.
A former Asio spy who infiltrated Haddad’s organisation between 2016 and 2023 told the ABC’s Four Corners program that young people in Haddad’s prayer centre were being indoctrinated into supporting Islamic State.
Section 18C is the most contested and controversial section of the Racial Discrimination Act. Several high-profile cases have seen it argued the section restricts freedom of speech and political communication in Australia.
