News · Criminal law explainer
Publicly threatening or inciting violence in NSW.
Joint state and federal task forces have again been reported investigating alleged hate-motivated conduct. In New South Wales the offence that most often applies to public threats and incitement of that kind is section 93Z of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). This note explains what the section covers, what makes conduct public, the penalties, and who can bring a prosecution. It is about the law, not about any individual, and anyone charged is presumed innocent.
By Aaron Kernaghan · Published 3 September 2026
What does section 93Z cover?
Section 93Z makes it an offence for a person, by a public act, to intentionally or recklessly threaten or incite violence towards another person or a group on one of the listed grounds. The grounds are race, religion or religious belief or affiliation, sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status, and HIV or AIDS status.
The offence has two limbs: threatening violence, and inciting others to violence. Either can be committed intentionally or recklessly. It targets conduct that puts a person or group at risk of violence because of who they are.
What is a public act?
The conduct has to be a public act. That includes any form of communication to the public, such as speaking, writing, displaying signs, or posting online, and any conduct observable by the public, including wearing or displaying symbols. Private remarks made only to one other person are generally not caught.
Because online communication is a public act, a post visible to the public can fall within the section. The reach of the communication is part of what makes it public.
What must the prosecution prove?
The prosecution must prove a public act, that the act threatened or incited violence towards a person or group, that this was on one of the listed grounds, and that the accused acted intentionally or recklessly. Threatening or inciting violence is the core: the section is not about offensive or insulting words alone, but about violence.
The line between strong or offensive expression and a threat or incitement of violence is where these cases are fought. Context, audience, and the words used all bear on whether the threshold is met.
What are the penalties, and who can prosecute?
The maximum penalty for an individual is 100 penalty units, or imprisonment for 3 years, or both. For a corporation the maximum is 500 penalty units. A New South Wales penalty unit is $110.
The requirement that the Director of Public Prosecutions consent before a prosecution was removed by reform in 2024. A prosecution may now be commenced by a police officer or by the DPP. Where the alleged conduct also involves online threats, Commonwealth offences about using a carriage service to menace or threaten may also apply.
How do these cases run?
These matters turn on exactly what was said or done, in what setting, and with what intention. Recklessness is enough, so the prosecution does not always have to prove the accused meant to threaten or incite violence, only that they were aware of a substantial risk and went ahead.
Because the conduct is often captured in a recording, a post, or a broadcast, the evidence is usually fixed early. What a person says about it afterwards, including in a police interview, can shape the case. Advice before answering questions is sensible.
Frequently asked.
What is section 93Z?
An offence under the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) of publicly threatening or inciting violence towards a person or group on grounds such as race, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status, or HIV or AIDS status.
What is the maximum penalty?
For an individual, 100 penalty units or three years imprisonment or both. For a corporation, 500 penalty units. A NSW penalty unit is $110.
Does it apply to social media posts?
It can. The offence requires a public act, which includes communication to the public online. A post visible to the public can be a public act for the purposes of section 93Z.
Does the Attorney-General have to consent to a prosecution?
No longer. The former requirement for the Director of Public Prosecutions to consent was removed by reform in 2024. A prosecution may now be commenced by a police officer or the DPP.
Is offensive speech enough?
No. The section is about threatening or inciting violence, not offensive or insulting words alone. The prosecution must prove the public act threatened or incited violence on one of the listed grounds.
To speak to a criminal defence lawyer, call Aaron Kernaghan on 0421 717 019.
This article is written by Aaron Kernaghan, criminal defence lawyer at Good Legal Lawyers, as at 3 September 2026. It is commentary and reflects the personal opinion of the author only. It is not legal advice, it is not a substitute for advice on your own matter, and it does not purport to be accurate or complete. Any matter referred to may be before the court and any person charged is presumed innocent. For advice on a specific matter, contact Aaron Kernaghan on 0421 717 019 or contact the firm.
More criminal-law commentary by Aaron Kernaghan.
Related across the firm