Australia’s parliament has passed a sweeping set of amendments to its hate crime laws, introducing mandatory prison sentences for individuals who display hate symbols or perform Nazi salutes.

The legislation, approved Thursday, also strengthens penalties for terrorism-related offenses, with officials describing it as “the toughest laws Australia has ever had against hate crimes.”

The amendments come amid a rise in high-profile antisemitic attacks, sparking intense national debate. Under the new laws:

• Displaying hate symbols or performing Nazi salutes will carry a minimum sentence of one year in prison.
• Financing terrorism will result in at least three years in prison.
• Committing or planning acts of terrorism will lead to a mandatory six-year sentence.

Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke defended the amendments, stressing that they aim to protect Australians from violence fueled by hate and extremism.

“This is not about politics,” Burke said. “This is about whether the Australian Parliament believes it’s acceptable to advocate, threaten, or commit violence against another person because of who they are, who they pray to, or who they love.”

The introduction of mandatory jail terms has received mixed reactions.

Critics argue that the ruling Labor Party—which has traditionally opposed mandatory sentencing—is caving to political pressure. Former Labor Senator Kim Carr condemned the legislation, calling it a violation of the party’s platform, which rejects mandatory sentencing on the grounds that it fails to deter crime and undermines judicial independence.

Meanwhile, opposition leaders accused the government of being slow to act.

Liberal Senator James Paterson criticized Labor for being “dragged kicking and screaming” into enacting tougher laws, stating:

“The parliament is not acting today because of the decisiveness of the Labor Party. This is about ensuring there are real penalties for this behavior.”

With the toughest penalties for hate crimes in Australian history now in place, the government aims to send a strong message against extremist behavior. However, the debate over mandatory sentencing and judicial independence is likely to continue, as lawmakers and legal experts assess the long-term implications of the reforms.