{"id":"racial-and-religious-tolerance-act-2001","name":"Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001","slug":"racial-and-religious-tolerance-act-2001","collection":"act","jurisdiction":"vic","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":174249,"registerId":"vic-racial-and-religious-tolerance-act-2001-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-05","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001","content":"Version No. 012\n\n**Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001**\n\n**No. 47 of 2001**\n\nVersion incorporating amendments as at  \n20 September 2025\n\n**table of provisions**\n\n*Section Page*\n\nPart 1—Preliminary 2\n\n1 Purposes 2\n\n2 Commencement 2\n\n3 Definitions 2\n\n4 Objects of Act 5\n\n5 Contravention does not create civil or criminal liability 6\n\n6 Act binds the Crown 6\n\nPart 2—Unlawful conduct 7\n\nDivision 1—Unlawful vilification 7\n\n7 Racial vilification unlawful 7\n\n8 Religious vilification unlawful 7\n\n9 Motive and dominant ground irrelevant 8\n\n10 Incorrect assumption as to race or religious belief or activity 8\n\n11 Exceptions—public conduct 8\n\n12 Exceptions—private conduct 9\n\nDivision 2—Other unlawful conduct 9\n\n13 Prohibition of victimisation 9\n\n14 What is victimisation? 9\n\n15 Prohibition of authorising or assisting vilification or victimisation 11\n\n16 Liability of person who authorises or assists 11\n\n17 Vicarious liability of employers and principals 11\n\n18 Exception to vicarious liability 12\n\nPart 3—Disputes 13\n\nDivision 1—Dispute resolution by the Commission 13\n\n19 Who may bring a dispute? 13\n\n20 Representative body may bring a dispute to the Commission 14\n\n21 Proceedings against unincorporated associations 15\n\n22 Application of Equal Opportunity Act 2010 to a dispute 15\n\nDivision 2—Applications to the Tribunal 16\n\n23 Application may be made to Tribunal in respect of dispute 16\n\n23A Who can apply? 16\n\n23B Representative body may apply to Tribunal 17\n\n23C What may the Tribunal decide? 18\n\n23D Commission may apply to enforce order of Tribunal 19\n\nPart 5—Transitional provisions 21\n\n29 Definitions 21\n\n30 Complaints lodged before commencement day 21\n\n31 Court or Tribunal may make orders of a transitional nature 22\n\nEndnotes 23\n\n1 General information 23\n\n2 Table of Amendments 25\n\n3 Explanatory details 26\n\n**Version No.** **012**\n\n**Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001**\n\n**No. 47 of 2001**\n\nVersion incorporating amendments as at  \n20 September 2025\n\n**Preamble**\n\n1 The Parliament recognises that freedom of expression is an essential component of a democratic society and that this freedom should be limited only to the extent that can be justified by an open and democratic society. The right of all citizens to participate equally in society is also an important value of a democratic society.\n\n2 The people of Victoria come from diverse ethnic and Indigenous backgrounds and observe many different religious beliefs and practices. The majority of Victorians embrace the benefits provided by this cultural diversity and are proud that people of these diverse ethnic, Indigenous and religious backgrounds live together harmoniously in Victoria.\n\n3 However, some Victorians are vilified on the ground of their race or their religious belief or activity. Vilifying conduct is contrary to democratic values because of its effect on people of diverse ethnic, Indigenous and religious backgrounds. It diminishes their dignity, sense of self-worth and belonging to the community. It also reduces their ability to contribute to, or fully participate in, all social, political, economic and cultural aspects of society as equals, thus reducing the benefit that diversity brings to the community.\n\n4 It is therefore desirable that the Parliament enact law for the people of Victoria that supports racial and religious tolerance.\n\n**The Parliament of Victoria therefore enacts as follows:**\n\nPart 1—Preliminary\n\n\t1 Purposes\n\nThe purposes of this Act are—\n\n(a) to promote racial and religious tolerance by prohibiting certain conduct involving the vilification of persons on the ground of race or religious belief or activity;\n\nS. 1(b) amended by No. 16/2010 s. 197(a).\n\n(b) to provide a means of redress for the victims of racial or religious vilification.\n\nS. 1(c) repealed by No. 16/2010 s. 197(b).\n\n* * * * *\n\n\t2 Commencement\n\n(1) Subject to subsection (2), this Act comes into operation on a day or days to be proclaimed.\n\n(2) If a provision referred to in subsection (1) does not come into operation before 1 January 2002, it comes into operation on that day.\n\n\t3 Definitions\n\nIn this Act—\n\n***child*** means a person under the age of 18 years;\n\nS. 3 def. of *Commission* amended by No. 43/2006 s. 47(Sch. item 6.1).\n\n***Commission*** means the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission;\n\nS. 3 def. of *Commis-sioner* inserted by No. 14/2009 s. 17(1), repealed by No. 16/2010 s. 198(c) (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.1)).\n\n* * * * *\n\nS. 3 def. of *complaint* repealed by No. 16/2010 s. 198(c) (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.1)).\n\n* * * * *\n\n***detriment*** includes humiliation and denigration;\n\nS. 3 def. of *disability* inserted by No. 16/2010 s. 198(a) (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.1)).\n\n***disability***  has the same meaning as in the **Equal Opportunity Act 2010**;\n\nS. 3 def. of *dispute* inserted by No. 16/2010 s. 198(a) (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.1)).\n\n***dispute*** means a dispute about an alleged contravention of Part 2;\n\nS. 3 def. of *dispute resolution* inserted by No. 16/2010 s. 198(a) (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.1)).\n\n***dispute resolution*** means dispute resolution conducted by the Commission under Division 1 of Part 8 of the **Equal Opportunity Act 2010**;\n\nS. 3 def. of *employee* amended by No. 16/2010 s. 198(b) (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.1)).\n\n***employee*** has the same meaning as in the **Equal Opportunity Act 2010**;\n\nS. 3 def. of *employer* amended by No. 16/2010 s. 198(b) (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.1)).\n\n***employer*** has the same meaning as in the **Equal Opportunity Act 2010**;\n\nS. 3 def. of *impairment* repealed by No. 16/2010 s. 198(c) (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.1)).\n\n* * * * *\n\n***parent*** includes—\n\n(a) step-parent;\n\n(b) adoptive parent;\n\n(c) foster parent;\n\n(d) guardian;\n\nS. 3 def. of *person* amended by No. 11/2025 s. 41.\n\n***person***—\n\n(a) in relation to a natural person, means a person of any age; and\n\n(b) includes an unincorporated association;\n\n***race*** includes—\n\n(a) colour;\n\n(b) descent or ancestry;\n\n(c) nationality or national origin;\n\n(d) ethnicity or ethnic origin;\n\n(e) if 2 or more distinct races are collectively referred to as a race—\n\n(i) each of those distinct races;\n\n(ii) that collective race;\n\n***religious belief or activity*** means—\n\n(a) holding or not holding a lawful religious belief or view;\n\n(b) engaging in, not engaging in or refusing to engage in a lawful religious activity;\n\n***Tribunal*** means Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal established by the **Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998**.\n\n\t4 Objects of Act\n\n(1) The objects of this Act are—\n\n(a) to promote the full and equal participation of every person in a society that values freedom of expression and is an open and multicultural democracy;\n\n(b) to maintain the right of all Victorians to engage in robust discussion of any matter of public interest or to engage in, or comment on, any form of artistic expression, discussion of religious issues or academic debate where such discussion, expression, debate or comment does not vilify or marginalise any person or class of persons;\n\nS. 4(1)(c) amended by No. 16/2010 s. 199.\n\n(c) to promote dispute resolution and resolve tensions between persons who (as a result of their ignorance of the attributes of others and the effect that their conduct may have on others) vilify others on the ground of race or religious belief or activity and those who are vilified.\n\n(2) It is the intention of the Parliament that the provisions of this Act are interpreted so as to further the objects set out in subsection (1).\n\n\t5 Contravention does not create civil or criminal liability\n\nA contravention of this Act does not create any civil or criminal liability except to the extent expressly provided by this Act.\n\n\t6 Act binds the Crown\n\nThis Act binds the Crown in right of Victoria and, so far as the legislative power of the Parliament permits, the Crown in all its other capacities.\n\nPart 2—Unlawful conduct\n\nDivision 1—Unlawful vilification\n\n\t7 Racial vilification unlawful\n\n(1) A person must not, on the ground of the race of another person or class of persons, engage in conduct that incites hatred against, serious contempt for, or revulsion or severe ridicule of, that other person or class of persons.\n\n(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), conduct—\n\n(a) may be constituted by a single occasion or by a number of occasions over a period of time; and\n\n(b) may occur in or outside Victoria.\n\n**Note**\n\n***Engage in conduct*** includes use of the internet or e-mail to publish or transmit statements or other material.\n\n\t8 Religious vilification unlawful\n\n(1) A person must not, on the ground of the religious belief or activity of another person or class of persons, engage in conduct that incites hatred against, serious contempt for, or revulsion or severe ridicule of, that other person or class of persons.\n\n**Note**\n\n***Engage in conduct*** includes use of the internet or e-mail to publish or transmit statements or other material.\n\n(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), conduct—\n\n(a) may be constituted by a single occasion or by a number of occasions over a period of time; and\n\n(b) may occur in or outside Victoria.\n\n\t9 Motive and dominant ground irrelevant\n\n(1) In determining whether a person has contravened section 7 or 8, the person's motive in engaging in any conduct is irrelevant.\n\n(2) In determining whether a person has contravened section 7 or 8, it is irrelevant whether or not the race or religious belief or activity of another person or class of persons is the only or dominant ground for the conduct, so long as it is a substantial ground.\n\n\t10 Incorrect assumption as to race or religious belief or activity\n\nIn determining whether a person has contravened section 7 or 8, it is irrelevant whether or not the person made an assumption about the race or religious belief or activity of another person or class of persons that was incorrect at the time that the contravention is alleged to have taken place.\n\nS. 11 amended by No. 25/2006 s. 9 (ILA s. 39B(1)).\n\n\t11 Exceptions—public conduct\n\n(1) A person does not contravene section 7 or 8 if the person establishes that the person's conduct was engaged in reasonably and in good faith—\n\n(a) in the performance, exhibition or distribution of an artistic work; or\n\n(b) in the course of any statement, publication, discussion or debate made or held, or any other conduct engaged in, for—\n\n(i) any genuine academic, artistic, religious or scientific purpose; or\n\n(ii) any purpose that is in the public interest; or\n\n(c) in making or publishing a fair and accurate report of any event or matter of public interest.\n\nS. 11(2) inserted by No. 25/2006 s. 9.\n\n(2) For the purpose of subsection (1)(b)(i), a religious purpose includes, but is not limited to, conveying or teaching a religion or proselytising.\n\n\t12 Exceptions—private conduct\n\n(1) A person does not contravene section 7 or 8 if the person establishes that the person engaged in the conduct in circumstances that may reasonably be taken to indicate that the parties to the conduct desire it to be heard or seen only by themselves.\n\n(2) Subsection (1) does not apply in relation to conduct in any circumstances in which the parties to the conduct ought reasonably to expect that it may be heard or seen by someone else.\n\nDivision 2—Other unlawful conduct\n\n\t13 Prohibition of victimisation\n\nA person must not victimise another person.\n\n\t14 What is victimisation?\n\n(1) A person victimises another person if the person subjects or threatens to subject the other person to any detriment because the other person, or a person associated (whether as a relative or otherwise) with the other person—\n\nS. 14(1)(a) substituted by No. 16/2010 s. 200(1)(a) (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.2)).\n\n(a) has brought a dispute against any person to the Commission for dispute resolution;\n\nS. 14(1)(ab) inserted by No. 16/2010 s. 200(1)(a) (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.2)).\n\n(ab) has made a complaint against any person;\n\n(b) has brought any other proceedings under this Act against any person;\n\n(c) has given evidence or information, or produced a document, in connection with any proceedings under this Act;\n\nS. 14(1)(d) substituted by No. 16/2010 s. 200(1)(b).\n\n(d) has attended a compulsory conference or mediation at the Tribunal in any proceedings under this Act;\n\n(e) has otherwise done anything in accordance with this Act in relation to any person;\n\n(f) has alleged that any person has contravened a provision of this Act, unless the allegation is false and was not made in good faith;\n\n(g) has refused to do anything that would contravene a provision of this Act—\n\nor because the person believes that the other person or the associate has done or intends to do any of those things.\n\n(2) It is sufficient for subsection (1)(f) that the allegation states the conduct that would constitute the contravention, without actually stating that this Act, or a provision of this Act, has been contravened.\n\n(3) In determining whether a person victimises another person it is irrelevant—\n\n(a) whether or not a factor in subsection (1) is the only or dominant ground for the treatment or threatened treatment, so long as it is a substantial ground;\n\n(b) whether the person acts alone or in association with any other person.\n\nS. 14(4) inserted by No. 16/2010 s. 200(2).\n\n(4) In this section, ***complaint*** means a complaint lodged under section 20, as in force before its repeal.\n\n\t15 Prohibition of authorising or assisting vilification or victimisation\n\nA person must not request, instruct, induce, encourage, authorise or assist another person to contravene a provision of this Part.\n\nS. 16 substituted by No. 16/2010 s. 201 (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.3)).\n\n\t16 Liability of person who authorises or assists\n\nIf, as a result of a person doing any of the things specified in section 15, the other person contravenes a provision of this Part, a person may—\n\n(a) bring a dispute to the Commission for dispute resolution; or\n\n(b) make an application to the Tribunal—\n\nagainst either the person who authorises or assists or the person who contravenes a provision of this Part or both of those persons.\n\nS. 17 substituted by No. 16/2010 s. 202 (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.4)).\n\n\t17 Vicarious liability of employers and principals\n\nIf a person in the course of employment or while acting as an agent—\n\n(a) contravenes a provision of this Part; or\n\n(b) engages in any conduct that would, if engaged in by the person's employer or principal, contravene a provision of this Part—\n\nboth the person and the employer or principal must be taken to have contravened the provision and a person may bring a dispute to the Commission for dispute resolution or make an application to the Tribunal against either or both of them.\n\n\t18 Exception to vicarious liability\n\nAn employer or principal is not vicariously liable for a contravention of a provision of this Part by an employee or agent if the employer or principal proves, on the balance of probabilities, that the employer or principal took reasonable precautions to prevent the employee or agent contravening this Part.\n\nPt 3 (Heading and ss 19–23) amended by Nos 25/2006 ss 10, 11, 14/2009 s. 17(2)(3), 16/2010 s. 213, substituted as Pt 3 (Heading and ss 19–23D) by No. 16/2010 s. 203 (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.5)).\n\nPart 3—Disputes\n\nDivision 1—Dispute resolution by the Commission\n\nS. 19 substituted by No. 16/2010 s. 203 (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.5)).\n\n\t19 Who may bring a dispute?\n\n(1) The following persons may bring a dispute to the Commission for dispute resolution—\n\n(a) a person who claims that another person has contravened a provision of Part 2 in relation to that person;\n\n(b) if that person is unable to bring a dispute because of disability—\n\n(i) a person authorised by that person to act on his or her behalf; or\n\n(ii) if that person is unable to authorise another person, any other person on his or her behalf;\n\n(c) if that person is a child—\n\n(i) the child; or\n\n(ii) a parent of the child on the child's behalf; or\n\n(iii) if the Commission is satisfied that the child or a parent of the child consents, any other person on the child's behalf.\n\n(2) A person may bring a dispute on behalf of the person and another person or persons if the Commission is satisfied that—\n\n(a) each person—\n\n(i) is entitled to bring a dispute under subsection (1)(a); and\n\n(ii) has consented to the dispute being brought on the person's behalf; and\n\n(b) the alleged contravention arises out of the same conduct.\n\n(3) An authorisation under subsection (1)(b)(i) may be given—\n\n(a) in writing; or\n\n(b) in any other manner approved by the Commission.\n\n(4) Two or more people may jointly bring a dispute to the Commission for dispute resolution.\n\n(5) It is not necessary for the alleged contravention to relate exclusively to the person bringing the dispute.\n\nS. 20 substituted by No. 16/2010 s. 203 (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.5)).\n\n\t20 Representative body may bring a dispute to the Commission\n\n(1) A representative body may bring to the Commission for dispute resolution a dispute on behalf of a named person or persons if the Commission is satisfied that—\n\n(a) each person—\n\n(i) is entitled to bring a dispute under section 19(1)(a); and\n\n(ii) has consented to the dispute being brought by the body on the person's behalf; and\n\n(b) the representative body has a sufficient interest in the dispute; and\n\n(c) if the dispute is brought on behalf of more than one person, the alleged contravention arises out of the same conduct.\n\n(2) A representative body has sufficient interest in a dispute if the conduct that constitutes the alleged contravention is a matter of genuine concern to the body because of the way conduct of that nature adversely affects or has the potential to adversely affect the interests of the body or the interests or welfare of the persons it represents.\n\nS. 21 substituted by No. 16/2010 s. 203 (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.5)).\n\n\t21 Proceedings against unincorporated associations\n\n(1) A dispute or other proceeding under this Act against an unincorporated association may be instituted and carried on against the association in the name of its president, secretary or other similar officer.\n\n(2) The death, resignation or removal of the person against whom the proceeding was instituted does not affect the continuity of the proceeding and it may be continued against the association in the name of that person's replacement.\n\nS. 22 substituted by No. 16/2010 s. 203 (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.5)).\n\n\t22 Application of Equal Opportunity Act 2010 to a dispute\n\n(1) Division 1 of Part 8 of the **Equal Opportunity Act 2010** applies to a dispute brought to the Commission for dispute resolution under this Act as if it were a dispute brought under that Act.\n\n(2) To avoid doubt, Division 3 of Part 11, Divisions 1 and 3 of Part 12 and section 189 of the **Equal Opportunity Act 2010** apply to disputes brought to the Commission for dispute resolution under this Act.\n\nDivision 2—Applications to the Tribunal\n\nS. 23 substituted by No. 16/2010 s. 203 (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.5)).\n\n\t23 Application may be made to Tribunal in respect of dispute\n\nA person may make an application to the Tribunal in respect of an alleged contravention of Part 2, whether or not the person has brought a dispute to the Commission for dispute resolution.\n\nS. 23A substituted by No. 16/2010 s. 203 (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.5)).\n\n\t23A Who can apply?\n\n(1) The following persons may make an application to the Tribunal under section 23—\n\n(a) a person who claims that another person has contravened a provision of Part 2 in relation to that person;\n\n(b) if that person is unable to make an application because of disability—\n\n(i) a person authorised by that person to act on his or her behalf; or\n\n(ii) if that person is unable to authorise another person, any other person on his or her behalf;\n\n(c) if that person is a child—\n\n(i) the child; or\n\n(ii) a parent of the child on the child's behalf; or\n\n(iii) if the Tribunal is satisfied that the child or a parent of the child consents, any other person on the child's behalf.\n\n(2) A person may make an application on behalf of the person and another person or persons if the Tribunal is satisfied that—\n\n(a) each person—\n\n(i) is entitled to make an application under subsection (1)(a); and\n\n(ii) has consented to the application being made on the person's behalf; and\n\n(b) the alleged contravention arises out of the same conduct.\n\n(3) An authorisation under subsection (1)(b)(i) may be given—\n\n(a) in writing; or\n\n(b) in any other manner approved by the Tribunal.\n\n(4) It is not necessary for the alleged contravention to relate exclusively to the person making the application.\n\nS. 23B inserted by No. 16/2010 s. 203 (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.5)).\n\n\t23B Representative body may apply to Tribunal\n\n(1) A representative body may make an application to the Tribunal on behalf of a named person or persons if the Tribunal is satisfied that—\n\n(a) each person—\n\n(i) is entitled to make an application under section 23A(1)(a); and\n\n(ii) has consented to the application being made by the body on the person's behalf; and\n\n(b) the representative body has a sufficient interest in the application; and\n\n(c) if the application is made on behalf of more than one person, the alleged contravention arises out of the same conduct.\n\n(2) A representative body has sufficient interest in an application if the conduct that constitutes the alleged contravention is a matter of genuine concern to the body because of the way conduct of that nature adversely affects or has the potential to adversely affect the interests of the body or the interests or welfare of the persons it represents.\n\nS. 23C inserted by No. 16/2010 s. 203 (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.5)).\n\n\t23C What may the Tribunal decide?\n\nAfter hearing the evidence and representations that the parties to an application desire to adduce or make, the Tribunal may—\n\n(a) find that a person has contravened a provision of Part 2 and make any one or more of the following orders—\n\n(i) an order that the person refrain from committing any further contravention of this Act;\n\n(ii) an order that the person pay to the applicant, within a specified period, an amount the Tribunal thinks fit to compensate the applicant for loss, damage or injury suffered in consequence of the contravention;\n\n(iii) an order that the person do anything specified in the order with a view to redressing any loss, damage or injury suffered by the applicant as a result of the contravention; or\n\n(b) find that a person has contravened a provision of Part 2 but decline to take any further action; or\n\n(c) find that a person has not contravened a provision of Part 2 and make an order that the application or part of the application be dismissed.\n\nS. 23D inserted by No. 16/2010 s. 203 (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.5)).\n\n\t23D Commission may apply to enforce order of Tribunal\n\n(1) This section applies if—\n\n(a) the Tribunal has made an order referred to in section 23C(a); and\n\n(b) a person has failed to comply with the order.\n\n(2) If the applicant consents, the Commission may enforce the order on behalf of the applicant in accordance with section 121(1) or 122(1) of the **Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998**.\n\n**Note**\n\nIf the Commission enforces the order in accordance with section 121(1) or 122(1) of the **Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998**, the applicant may subsequently enforce that order as an order of the court. See sections 121(3) and 122(3) of the **Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998**.\n\nPt 4 (Heading and ss 24–28) repealed by No. 11/2025 s. 42.\n\n* * * * *\n\nPt 5 (Heading and ss 29–31) amended by Nos 25/2006 s. 12, 43/2006 s. 47(Sch. item 6.2), substituted by No. 16/2010 s. 204 (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.6)).\n\nPart 5—Transitional provisions\n\nS. 29 substituted by No. 16/2010 s. 204 (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.6)).\n\n\t29 Definitions\n\nIn this Part—\n\n***commencement day*** means the day that Division 1 of Part 14 of the **Equal Opportunity Act 2010** comes into operation;\n\n***complainant*** means a person who lodges a complaint or on whose behalf a complaint is lodged;\n\n***complaint*** means a complaint lodged under section 20, as in force before the commencement day;\n\n***old EO Act*** means the **Equal Opportunity Act 1995**, as in force immediately before the commencement day.\n\nS. 30 substituted by No. 16/2010 s. 204 (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.6)).\n\n\t30 Complaints lodged before commencement day\n\n(1) This section applies to a complaint that was lodged with the Commissioner, but not finally dealt with before the commencement day.\n\n(2) Part 3 of this Act as in force immediately before the commencement day and the old EO Act continue to apply to the complaint if the respondent was notified of the complaint under section 107 of the old EO Act before the commencement day, unless the parties to the complaint consent in writing to the complaint being dealt with as a dispute.\n\n(3) If the parties to a complaint consent to the complaint being dealt with as a dispute—\n\n(a) the complaint is taken to be a dispute; and\n\n(b) the complainant is taken to have brought a dispute to the Commission for dispute resolution under Part 3; and\n\n(c) anything done under Part 3 of this Act as in force immediately before the commencement day or the old EO Act in relation to the complaint is taken, to the extent it could have been done under Part 3, to have been done under Part 3.\n\n(4) If the respondent had not been notified of the complaint under section 107 of the old EO Act before the commencement day—\n\n(a) the complaint is taken to be a dispute; and\n\n(b) the complainant is taken to have brought a dispute to the Commission under Part 3 for dispute resolution.\n\nS. 31 substituted by No. 16/2010 s. 204 (as amended by No. 26/2011 s. 34(Sch. item 9.6)).\n\n\t31 Court or Tribunal may make orders of a transitional nature\n\n(1) If any difficulty arises in a proceeding because of the operation of this Part, the court or the Tribunal may make any order it considers appropriate to resolve the difficulty.\n\n(2) The court or the Tribunal may make such an order on the application of any party to the proceeding or on its own initiative.\n\n\n\nEndnotes\n\n1 General information\n\nSee [www.legislation.vic.gov.au](http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au) for Victorian Bills, Acts and current Versions of legislation and up-to-date legislative information.\n\n*Minister's second reading speech—*\n\n*Legislative Assembly: 17 May 2001*\n\n*Legislative Council: 7 June 2001*\n\nThe long title for the Bill for this Act was \"A Bill to promote racial and religious tolerance by prohibiting the vilification of persons on the ground of race or religious belief or activity, to amend the **Equal Opportunity Act 1995** and for other purposes.\"\n\nThe **Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001** was assented to on 27 June 2001 and came into operation on 1 January 2002: section 2(2).\n\nINTERPRETATION OF LEGISLATION ACT 1984 (ILA)\n\nStyle changes\n\nSection 54A of the ILA authorises the making of the style changes set out in Schedule 1 to that Act.\n\nReferences to ILA s. 39B\n\nSidenotes which cite ILA s. 39B refer to section 39B of the ILA which provides that where an undivided section or clause of a Schedule is amended by the insertion of one or more subsections or subclauses, the original section or clause becomes subsection or subclause (1) and is amended by the insertion of the expression \"(1)\" at the beginning of the original section or clause.\n\nInterpretation\n\nAs from 1 January 2001, amendments to section 36 of the ILA have the following effects:\n\n• Headings\n\nAll headings included in an Act which is passed on or after 1 January 2001 form part of that Act. Any heading inserted in an Act which was passed before 1 January 2001, by an Act passed on or after 1 January 2001, forms part of that Act. This includes headings to Parts, Divisions or Subdivisions in a Schedule; sections; clauses; items; tables; columns; examples; diagrams; notes or forms. See section 36(1A)(2A).\n\n• Examples, diagrams or notes\n\nAll examples, diagrams or notes included in an Act which is passed on or after 1 January 2001 form part of that Act. Any examples, diagrams or notes inserted in an Act which was passed before 1 January 2001, by an Act passed on or after 1 January 2001, form part of that Act. See section 36(3A).\n\n• Punctuation\n\nAll punctuation included in an Act which is passed on or after 1 January 2001 forms part of that Act. Any punctuation inserted in an Act which was passed before 1 January 2001, by an Act passed on or after 1 January 2001, forms part of that Act. See section 36(3B).\n\n• Provision numbers\n\nAll provision numbers included in an Act form part of that Act, whether inserted in the Act before, on or after 1 January 2001. Provision numbers include section numbers, subsection numbers, paragraphs and subparagraphs. See section 36(3C).\n\n• Location of \"legislative items\"\n\nA \"legislative item\" is a penalty, an example or a note. As from 13 October 2004, a legislative item relating to a provision of an Act is taken to be at the foot of that provision even if it is preceded or followed by another legislative item that relates to that provision. For example, if a penalty at the foot of a provision is followed by a note, both of these legislative items will be regarded as being at the foot of that provision. See section 36B.\n\n• Other material\n\nAny explanatory memorandum, table of provisions, endnotes, index and other material printed after the Endnotes does not form part of an Act.  \nSee section 36(3)(3D)(3E).\n\n2 Table of Amendments\n\nThis publication incorporates amendments made to the **Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001** by Acts and subordinate instruments.\n\n–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––\n\n**Equal Opportunity and Tolerance Legislation (Amendment) Act 2006, No. 25/2006**\n\n| Assent Date: | 6.6.06 |\n| --- | --- |\n| Commencement Date: | S. 10(3) on 7.6.06: s. 2(1); ss 9, 10(1)(2), 11, 12 on 30.6.06: Government Gazette 29.6.06 p. 1314 |\n| Current State: | This information relates only to the provision/s amending the **Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001** |\n\n\n**Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006, No. 43/2006**\n\n| Assent Date: | 25.7.06 |\n| --- | --- |\n| Commencement Date: | S. 47(Sch. item 6) on 1.1.07: s. 2(1) |\n| Current State: | This information relates only to the provision/s amending the **Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001** |\n\n\n**Equal Opportunity Amendment (Governance) Act 2009, No. 14/2009**\n\n| Assent Date: | 7.4.09 |\n| --- | --- |\n| Commencement Date: | S. 17 on 1.10.09: s. 2(2) |\n| Current State: | This information relates only to the provision/s amending the **Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001** |\n\n\n**Equal Opportunity Act 2010, No. 16/2010** (as amended by No. 26/2011)\n\n| Assent Date: | 27.4.10 |\n| --- | --- |\n| Commencement Date: | S. 213 on 28.4.10: s. 2(1): ss 197–204 on 1.8.11: s. 2(4) |\n| Current State: | This information relates only to the provision/s amending the **Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001** |\n\n\n**Justice Legislation Amendment (Anti‐vilification and Social Cohesion) Act 2025, No. 11/2025**\n\n| Assent Date: | 8.4.25 |\n| --- | --- |\n| Commencement Date: | Ss 41, 42 on 20.9.25: s. 2(3) |\n| Current State: | This information relates only to the provision/s amending the **Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001** |\n\n\n–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––\n\n3 Explanatory details\n\nNo entries at date of publication.","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":6,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"The Act’s scope and dispute processes have been altered by later amendments. Key changes in the source text: Division of dispute resolution was integrated with the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (s 22) and Part 3 was substantially reworked (ss 19–23D) by No. 16/2010 (see table of amendments). Part 4 was repealed by the Justice Legislation Amendment (Anti‑vilification and Social Cohesion) Act 2025 (No. 11/2025) and the definition of \"person\" was amended to explicitly include unincorporated associations (s 3 as amended by No. 11/2025 s 41). These amendments changed who may bring disputes, how disputes are processed, and some procedural enforcement mechanisms (ss 19–23D, s 22, s 23D; table of amendments)."},"complexity_factors":["Cross-references to other Acts (Equal Opportunity Act 2010, Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998) which determine dispute resolution and enforcement procedures (s 22; s 23D).","Legal standards requiring factual assessments (e.g. whether conduct \"incites hatred\"; whether conduct was \"reasonably and in good faith\" under exceptions) (ss 7–8, 11).","Vicarious liability with an evidentiary defence (employer must prove \"reasonable precautions\") creates mixed substantive and procedural issues for employers and tribunals (ss 17–18).","Multiple pathways and actors: Commission dispute resolution, representative bodies, direct Tribunal applications, and Commission enforcement of Tribunal orders (ss 19–23D).","Definitions that incorporate other legislation and broaden scope (e.g. \"employee\", \"employer\", \"dispute resolution\" defined by reference to Equal Opportunity Act 2010) (s 3).","Geographical reach of prohibitions to conduct outside Victoria and inclusion of internet publication increases evidentiary and enforcement complexity (ss 7(2), 8(2), notes).","Historical layers of amendment (notably No. 16/2010 and No. 11/2025) that changed procedural structure and repealed parts, requiring attention to version history (table of amendments, endnotes)."],"plain_english_summary":"# What this law does\n\n- The Act makes it unlawful to vilify people on the basis of race or religious belief or activity. That means a person must not engage in conduct that, on those grounds, incites hatred, serious contempt, revulsion or severe ridicule (see sections 7–8). The prohibition covers single acts or repeated acts and expressly includes publication via the internet or e‑mail (ss 7(2), 8(2), notes to ss 7–8).\n\n- The Act also forbids victimisation — subjecting or threatening to subject someone to any detriment because they used the Act’s processes or otherwise acted under the Act (s 13; definition of \"victimise\" in s 14). It forbids asking, authorising or assisting others to commit vilification or victimisation (s 15) and sets out liability where that happens (s 16).\n\n- Employers and principals can be held vicariously liable for vilifying conduct by employees or agents carried out in the course of employment or agency (s 17). An employer or principal has a defence if they prove, on the balance of probabilities, that they took reasonable precautions to prevent the contravention (s 18).\n\n- The Act provides a two‑stage enforcement pathway:\n  - Dispute resolution through the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission (the Commission). Eligible persons, children (through parents), disabled persons (through authorised representatives), two or more people jointly, and representative bodies may bring disputes to the Commission (ss 19–20). The Commission’s handling of disputes is governed by provisions of the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 that are applied to disputes under this Act (s 22).\n  - Applications to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT, \"the Tribunal\"). A person may apply to the Tribunal whether or not they first brought a dispute to the Commission (s 23). The Tribunal may make orders that an alleged contravener refrain from further contraventions, pay compensation, or take actions to redress loss or injury (s 23C). The Commission may enforce Tribunal orders in specified circumstances (s 23D).\n\n- The Act contains exceptions where vilifying conduct is not unlawful if the defendant establishes the conduct was reasonable and in good faith, including artistic work, genuine academic/religious/scientific purposes, matters in the public interest, and fair and accurate reporting (s 11). There is also an exception for private communications where parties reasonably expect privacy (s 12). The Act’s objects include promoting tolerance while maintaining freedom of expression and robust public discussion (s 4).\n\n# Who it affects and who decides\n\n- Individuals who publish or communicate material (including online) that incites hatred or severe contempt on racial or religious grounds are directly affected (ss 7–8).\n- Employers, principals and organisations are affected because of vicarious liability for employees or agents (ss 17–18).\n- Representative bodies and the Commission can bring or resolve disputes (ss 20, 23B, 23D). The Commission decides whether to accept and resolve disputes under the Equal Opportunity Act rules applied by s 22. The Tribunal decides evidence and remedies (ss 22, 23–23C).\n\n# How it matters mechanically — incentives, costs and compliance\n\n- Liability and remedies: The Tribunal can order injunctive-type relief (stop the conduct), monetary compensation, and remedial acts (s 23C). That creates a direct financial and operational incentive for alleged contraveners to avoid conduct covered by the Act.\n\n- Employers and principals face an incentive to implement policies, training and monitoring to avoid vicarious liability because an available defence is proving \"reasonable precautions\" were taken (s 18). That imposes compliance costs on businesses and organisations (ss 17–18).\n\n- Freedom of expression is preserved to the extent conduct falls within the listed exceptions, but defendants bear the evidentiary burden of establishing the \"reasonably and in good faith\" standard for those exceptions (s 11). Motive is irrelevant in deciding contravention (s 9(1)), and it is irrelevant whether the protected attribute was the only or dominant ground so long as it was a substantial ground (s 9(2)). These doctrinal rules shape how disputes are litigated.\n\n- Cross‑jurisdictional scope: The prohibited conduct may occur in or outside Victoria (ss 7(2)(b), 8(2)(b)). That broadens the practical range of conduct the Act can target but raises enforcement and evidence‑gathering considerations.\n\n- Procedural and administrative effects: The Act relies on Commission dispute resolution procedures incorporated from the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (s 22). That creates administrative discretion for the Commission about how disputes are handled, while VCAT makes findings and can impose orders (ss 22, 23–23D).\n\n# Trade‑offs and practical risks\n\n- Benefits are concentrated for persons who are targets of racial or religious vilification; costs of compliance (training, policies, legal defence) are spread among individuals, employers and organisations that communicate or host speech (ss 1, 17–18, 23C).\n\n- The need to prove \"reasonably and in good faith\" for exceptions places an evidentiary burden on defendants and creates some legal uncertainty about borderline cases (s 11).\n\n- Because motive is irrelevant, the Act focuses on the objective effect of conduct rather than intent (s 9(1)), which reduces opportunities to avoid liability by proving lack of hostile motive but increases the importance of the objective factual record.\n\n- The Commission can enforce Tribunal orders where an applicant consents (s 23D). That centralises enforcement options and may reduce the administrative burden for successful applicants but also concentrates discretion about enforcement decisions in the Commission.\n\n# Source of purpose claims and statutory mechanisms\n\n- The Act states its purposes: to promote tolerance by prohibiting vilification and to provide redress for victims (s 1). The rest of the Act implements those purposes by defining prohibited conduct (Part 2), setting exceptions (ss 11–12), creating liability rules including vicarious liability (ss 15–18), and providing dispute resolution and Tribunal remedies (Part 3, ss 19–23D). Amendments and cross-references to the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 and the VCAT Act shape how disputes are processed (s 22; endnotes and table of amendments)."},"kimi_summary":{"_metrics":{"source":"grok-batch-everything"},"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":7,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"The original 2001 Act focused on creating prohibitions against racial and religious vilification (ss 7–8) and basic redress mechanisms. Subsequent amendments, especially the 2010 changes, have substantially broadened the scope by replacing the old complaint system with a dispute-resolution framework aligned to the Equal Opportunity Act 2010, adding representative-body standing, explicit vicarious liability and victimisation protections, expanded transitional rules, and enforcement powers for the Commission (s 23D). The 2025 amendments further refined definitions and repealed Part 4, shifting the statute from a standalone prohibition-and-redress model to a more integrated human-rights enforcement vehicle."},"complexity_factors":["Extensive cross-references to procedures in the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (ss 19–23D, s 22)","Nested exceptions and defences (ss 11–12, 18) with good-faith and reasonableness tests","Detailed rules on standing, representative actions, children, disability and unincorporated associations (ss 19–21, 23A–23B)","Expanded definitions that incorporate concepts from other statutes (e.g. 'disability', 'employee', 'employer')","Transitional provisions preserving pre-2011 complaints (Part 5, ss 29–31)","Multiple layers of liability rules (victimisation, authorisation/assistance, vicarious liability in ss 13–18)"],"plain_english_summary":"**The Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001** makes it unlawful in Victoria to vilify people (incite hatred, serious contempt, revulsion or severe ridicule against them) because of their race or religious belief or activity. **Race** is defined broadly to cover colour, ancestry, nationality, ethnicity and collective racial groups. **Religious belief or activity** includes holding or rejecting lawful religious views and taking part (or refusing to take part) in lawful religious practices.\n\nThe law aims to promote tolerance and equality while protecting free speech. It allows victims (or people acting for them, including parents, guardians or representative organisations) to seek help through the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission for conciliation. If needed, they can apply to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) for orders such as compensation, an apology, or directions to stop the behaviour.\n\nIt also bans **victimisation** (punishing someone for making a complaint or giving evidence) and makes employers and principals responsible for what their staff or agents do unless they took reasonable steps to prevent it. There are clear exceptions for private conversations, artistic works, genuine academic, religious or scientific discussions, and fair reports of public interest matters, provided they are done reasonably and in good faith.\n\nThis matters because it gives everyday people a practical way to challenge harmful hate-based conduct that harms dignity and community participation, while making sure robust public debate is not chilled."},"summary":{"complexity_score":6,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"The original bill focused primarily on racial vilification, consistent with existing Commonwealth and state anti-discrimination frameworks. The scope was broadened during passage to include religious vilification, making Victoria one of the first jurisdictions in Australia to extend statutory protection to religion as a characteristic. This expansion proved controversial and significantly widened the law's reach beyond its initial framing."},"complexity_factors":["Dual enforcement pathway — civil complaints and criminal prosecution — with different thresholds and processes for each","Key concepts like 'incitement', 'vilification', 'hatred', and 'serious contempt' are legally contested and require case-by-case interpretation","Multiple exemptions (artistic, academic, religious discussion, fair reporting) that require careful analysis to determine whether they apply in any given situation","Tension between competing rights — freedom of expression versus protection from hatred — creates interpretive difficulty","Distinguishing protected religious commentary or criticism from prohibited religious vilification is a fine and disputed line","Limited legislative text provided makes full assessment of procedural complexity difficult — the full Act contains additional complaint and enforcement machinery"],"plain_english_summary":"## Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001 (Victoria)\n\nThis Victorian law makes it **illegal to publicly vilify (seriously demean or attack) people because of their race or religion**.\n\n### Who does this affect?\n- **Everyone in Victoria** — individuals, organisations, and businesses\n- People who believe they have been targeted because of their race or religious beliefs\n- Publishers, broadcasters, social media users, and public speakers\n\n### What does it actually do?\n- **Prohibits racial and religious vilification** — you cannot engage in conduct that incites (encourages or stirs up) hatred against, serious contempt for, or revulsion or severe ridicule of a person or group because of their race or religion\n- Creates **two levels of offence**: a civil (non-criminal) level for general vilification, and a more serious **criminal offence** for conduct involving threats or incitement to violence\n- Provides a **complaints process** through the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission (VEOHRC) where affected people can seek resolution\n- Includes **exemptions (exceptions)** for things like genuine artistic works, academic research, fair reporting, and genuine religious discussion — so not all criticism or commentary is captured\n\n### What are the practical consequences?\n- Someone who vilifies another person civilly can be taken to the Commission and potentially ordered to apologise, pay compensation, or stop the conduct\n- Criminal vilification (the more serious type) can result in **fines or imprisonment**\n- The law does **not ban robust debate, criticism of ideas, or satire** — it targets conduct likely to stir up genuine hatred or contempt toward people as a group\n\n### Why does it matter?\n- Balances **freedom of speech** against the right of people to live free from hatred and persecution based on who they are or what they believe\n- One of the few Australian laws that **extends protections to religion**, not just race"}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/racial-and-religious-tolerance-act-2001","history":"/api/acts/racial-and-religious-tolerance-act-2001/history","analysis":"/api/acts/racial-and-religious-tolerance-act-2001/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/racial-and-religious-tolerance-act-2001/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/racial-and-religious-tolerance-act-2001/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/racial-and-religious-tolerance-act-2001/documents"}}