(NSW) Repeal Criminalisation for Civil Disruption on Major Bridges, Tunnels and Roads

Download the 1-Page Brief Here - (NSW) Repeal Criminalisation for Civil Disruption on Majo.

Download • 168KB

Author: Noah Star, Bianca-Rose Sun, Alexis Nguyen, Jemail Asani & Sonal Kamble | Publish date: 28/7/2026

• P: In NSW, a person can be fined up to $22,000 and/or sentenced up to 2 years’ imprisonment if they cause disruption to major roads, bridges or tunnels during an unauthorised protest. 

• S: The NSW Attorney General should repeal Section 144G of the Roads Act 1993 (NSW) to remove the criminalisation of individuals obstructing major bridges, tunnels and roads.

• E: NSW Council for Civil Liberties: ‘Section 144G of the Roads Act 1993 (NSW) … ought to be repealed.’

  
  

Problem Identification: 

Section 144G(2) of the Roads Act 1993 (NSW) (the Act) criminalises an unauthorised protest that ‘seriously disrupts or obstructs vehicles or pedestrians’ and results in a closure or redirection on a ‘bridge, tunnel or road’. Section 144G(1) states that such disruptions can incur a maximum penalty of ‘200 penalty units [equating to $22,000] or imprisonment for 2 years, or both.’

According to the Human Rights Law Centre (HRLC), this means that ‘almost all protest activity on roads without prior approval’ from NSW Police under the notification system can be deemed an unauthorised protest. They said that this leaves protestors vulnerable to ‘significant penalt[ies]’ in the form of imprisonment or fines.

Context: 

An unauthorised protest refers to a protest where organisers have either not provided notice to NSW Police via the Form 1 notification system, or where NSW Police have opposed the protest and a court has issued a prohibition order. In contrast, the HRLC defined an authorised protest as one not 'opposed by the Police Commissioner' and thus, protesters are ‘not liable for any offence relating to participating in an “unlawful assembly”.’

In 2022, the Roads and Crimes Legislation Amendment Act 2022 (NSW) was enacted to expand criminal liability under section 144G from ‘major bridge or tunnel’ to ‘major bridge, tunnel or road.’

In 1980, Australia ratified the right to peaceful assembly in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966 (ICCPR). Under Article 21, ‘no restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right’, except in the interests of ‘public safety [or] public order’. The HRLC outlined that peaceful protesters are protected under the ICCPR, ‘regardless if they are, or could be, temporarily disruptive.’ Further, the Australian Human Rights Commission stated that under international human rights law, ‘people do not need permission from [the] government to protest’.

Arguments:

The 2024 University of Technology Sydney (UTS) submission to Review the Roads Act 1993 stated that these measures ‘dampen the capacity for peaceful protest and assembly by intimidating protesters with their punitive effect.’ The HRLC argued that the ‘severe’ penalties under Section 144G (i.e. ‘severe financial ruin or jail’) ‘effectively compel protest organisers to seek authorisation for protests in public spaces’. Whilst the HRLC outlined that the notification system is ‘technically optional’ under the Act, punitive measures have created a ‘system of permitting protests’ in practice. 

Former Minister for NSW Police Paul Toole stated that the right to protest ‘must be weighed against the right of other members of the public to move freely’. However, the NSW Council for Civil Liberties (NSWCCL) declared that ‘no such balance has been struck.’ The UTS submission argued that the law provides a ‘disproportionate punishment to the inconvenience caused’. Azadeh Dastyari, Lecturer at the Faculty of Law at Monash University, described the restrictions on protest as presenting ‘some of the most draconian limitations on protest in the country owing to its wide application and harsh penalties.’ In 2022, climate activist Deanna Coco was sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment under Section 144G for blocking one lane of traffic on Sydney Harbour Bridge for 25 minutes. The UTS submission noted a sentence of 15 months ‘is often prescribed in response to repeated instances of property offending or aggravated assaults.’ Dastyari concluded that ‘while CoCo’s [sic] act of civil disobedience was irrefutably and intentionally inconvenient, there was no allegation that she was in any way violent.’

Advice/Solution Identification:

The HRLC and the NSWCCL have called for the repeal of criminalisation for civil disruption on bridges, tunnels or roads. The HRLC stated that this could support the government’s ‘obligation to protect protesters [who] use peaceful collective civil disobedience or direct-action tactics.’ According to Dastyari, decriminalising civil disruption would ensure people ‘are not unlawfully limited in their freedom of expression and association’.

Precedent:

If NSW were to decriminalise civil disruption on major bridges, tunnels and roads, it would be world-leading to the best of the authors’ knowledge.

---

Public Support: 

1. Human Rights Law Centre (HRLC)

2. NSW Council for Civil Liberties (NSWCCL)

3. Dr Elyse Methven, Senior Lecturer in Law at UTS

4. Derick Luong, Lecturer in Law at UTS

5. Dr Thalia Anthony, Professor of Law at UTS

Broad Support:

1. Amnesty International Australia has supported changes to the Roads Act to maintain the rights of protesters. However, they have not explicitly called to repeal criminalisation for civil disruption of major bridges, tunnels and roads.

2. Australian Democracy Network has called for the repeal and/or amendment of ‘anti-protest’ laws in Australia, but have not explicitly called to repeal criminalisation for civil disruption of major bridges, tunnels and roads in NSW.

The following legal, human rights, and community organisations were signatories to CounterAct’s 2022 open letter to the NSW Government calling on it ‘to cease the introduction of draconian penalties for protests’.

3. 350 Australia

4. Aboriginal Legal Service NSW/ACT

5. ActionReady

6. AidWatch

7. Amnesty International

8. Asylum Seekers Centre

9. Australian Centre for International Justice

10. Australian Council of Social Service

11. Australian Democracy Network

12. Australian Forests and Climate Alliance

13. Australian Youth Climate Council

14. Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility

15. Bellingen Environment Centre

16. Bob Brown Foundation

17. Community Legal Centres NSW

18. CounterAct

19. Dying with Dignity NSW

20. Forest Conservation Victoria

21. Forest Defence NSW

22. Friends of the Earth Australia

23. Friends of the Forest Mogo

24. Frontline Action on Coal

25. Goongerah Environment Centre

26. Great Southern Forest

27. Grata Fund

28. Greenpeace Australia Pacific

29. Human Rights Law Centre

30. Inner City Legal Centre

31. Jesuit Social Services

32. Legal Observers NSW

33. Medical Association for Prevention of War

34. Melbourne Activist Legal Support

35. National Justice Project

36. Redfern Legal Centre

37. South East Region Conservation Alliance Inc

38. The Sunrise Project

39. WA Forest Alliance

40. Whitsunday Conservation Council

41. Youth Support + Advocacy Service

    
    

This list reflects publicly stated positions and should not necessarily be taken as endorsement of this specific brief.

News Coverage:

• Human Rights Watch - “Australia: Excessive Force Used Against Herzog Protesters”. This article covered the Pro-Palestine protests on 9 February, including the restrictions that were imposed by NSW Police and the arrests and charges that followed as a result. By: No author listed | 10 February 2026. Read the article here.

• The Guardian - “Palestine Action Group plans march against Isacc Herzog’s visit despite protest restrictions”. This article reported on the Palestine Action Group’s plan on marching against the Israeli president and highlighted the extended restrictions on protest. By: Jordyn Beazley | 3 February 2026. Read the article here.

• Honi Soit - “NSW Anti-protest laws under departmental review: open letter demands transparency”. This article highlighted the open letter supported by 38 human rights unions, advocacy, and civil society organisations calling for the repeal of NSW anti-protests laws and better transparency between the public and government. By: Zeina Khochaiche and Aidan Elwig Pollock | 7 April 2024. Read the article here.

• Sydney Criminal Lawyers - “NSW Government to Continue Anti-Protest Regime, Despite Public Opinion Being Against It”. This article covered the continued efforts of the NSW Government in maintaining section 144G despite community opposition. By: Paul Gregoire | 20 November 2024. Read the article here.

• Sydney Criminal Lawyers - “The Offence of Damage, Destruction or Obstruction of Major Bridges, Roads and Tunnels in NSW”. This article provided additional legal information alongside Violet Coco’s case regarding the conduct that occurred and what warrants an offence under section 144G. By: Ugur Nedim | 20 January 2023 - Read the article here.

• Sydney Criminal Lawyers - “Climate Defender Emma Dorge Takes Plea Deal Over Nonviolent Direct Action”. This article covered climate activist Emma Dorge’s court appearance on charges related to her blocking all rail traffic at a fossil fuel-shipping seaport. By: Paul Gregoire | 18 December 2022. Read the article here.

• The Guardian - “Climate activist who blocked traffic on Sydney Harbour Bridge jailed for at least eight months”. This article covers the protest undertaken by Violet Coco on the Sydney Harbour Bridge and the charges that followed as a result of her disruptions. By Elias Visontay | 2 December 2022. Read the article here.

Where to go to learn more: 

1. (2024) Review of Part 9, Division 7 in line with Section 144H of the Roads Act 1993 (NSW) | NSW Council for Civil Liberties - This submission by the NSWCCL provided a review of section 144G of the Roads Act 1993 (NSW), which outlined the ‘punitive’ measures that undermine civil liberties and deter protestors from exercising their right to protest. Read the submission here. 

2. (2024) Review into the Roads Act 1993 (NSW) | Human Rights Law Centre - The Human Rights Law Centre provided a detailed submission to the NSW Government’s review of the Roads Act 1993 (NSW). The review argued that the policy objectives of the Act are not consistent with Australia’s international human rights obligations. Read the submission here.

3. (2023) Policy: The Right to Protest | NSW Council for Civil Liberties - This article from the NSWCCL examined Section 144G and its impact on the right to protest. These recommendations include the decriminalisation of non-violent protest. Read the article here.

4. (2024) In Defence of Dissent | Australian Democracy Network - This paper examined how notification and pre-approval systems impact the right to protest freely. It recommended changes to the notification regime to enshrine rights to peaceful assembly and fulfil Australia’s democratic obligations. Read the paper here.

5. (2023) Declaration of Our Right to Protest | Human Rights Law Centre - This declaration by the HRLC highlighted the fundamental principles of the rights of protesters and provided statements on how governments should ensure such rights are not impeded by legislation. They stated authorities are ‘obligated to protect protesters that use peaceful collective civil disobedience or direct-action tactics.’ Read the declaration here.

6. (2024) Protest Law in New South Wales | Parliamentary Research Service - This research paper provided an overview of NSW’s legal framework for protest activity and compared it with other Australian jurisdictions, and analysed the 2022 anti-protest amendments that may burden the implied freedom of political communication. Read the research paper here.

7. (2020) General Comment No. 37 on Article 21 (Right of peaceful assembly) | UN Human Rights Commission - The General Comment on Article 21 of the ICCPR provided an overview of the right of peaceful assembly. It outlined the responsibilities of signatory states, including an obligation to allow peaceful assemblies ‘to take place without unwarranted interference and … protect the participants’. Read the General Comment here.

8. Roads Act 1993 (NSW) - Read the full Act here.

Human Perspective: 

Aisha is a university student and long-time climate activist in Sydney. When her group planned a march along Parramatta Road to coincide with a major energy policy announcement, she submitted a Form 1 notification to NSW Police 5 days in advance. Aisha understood that under international law, notifications should be optional. However, she still submitted it as per request by NSW Police. A week later, police opposed the assembly without explanation. Aisha felt confused as the route was one her group had used before without incident. As her organisation was unable to afford legal advice to contest the NSW Police ruling in the NSW Supreme Court, several members quietly dropped out of the march rather than risk a fine or imprisonment. On the day, Aisha and a smaller group proceeded. The police issued a ‘Move On’ direction, and Aisha negotiated with the marshal for the protest to be redirected away from the footpath and onto a lane of the road. However, as they were still obstructing a road, this was considered a ‘serious disruption’, and the group were arrested. She was later released on bail and made to appear in court, where she received a $10,000 fine. Aisha felt that she had tried to do everything right; she had notified the police, planned carefully, and acted peacefully. The next time her group began planning an action, she found herself hesitating in a way she had never before. 

To protect the anonymity of those involved, this is a fictionalised account drawn from an amalgamation of real-life stories, experiences and testimonials gathered during the research process for this brief. Any resemblance to actual individuals is purely coincidental.

Conflict of interest/acknowledgment statement: 

N/A.

Support 

If your organisation would like to add your support to this paper or suggest amendments, please email Info@foreaustralia.com. 

Disclaimers

Please review all FORE disclaimers here.

Reference list: 

Anthony, T., Luong, D., & Methven, E. (2024). Review of Roads Act 1993, Part 9, Division 7 and Crimes Act 1900, Part 4AF. Department of Communities and Justice. https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/handle/10453/179466

Australian Democracy Network & Human Rights Law Centre. (2023). Declaration of our right to protest. https://raisely-images.imgix.net/australian-democracy-network/uploads/declaration-right-to-protest-pdf-af6a7d.pdf 

Australian Human Rights Commission (2025, August 21). Explainer: Protest Rights in Australia. https://humanrights.gov.au/resource-hub/by-resource-type/publications/rights-and-freedoms/guides/protest-rights-australia-explainer?#

Australian Human Rights Commission (2012, December 14). Australian Treaty Ratifications as of May 2012 - Human rights at your fingertips. https://humanrights.gov.au/resource-hub/by-resource-type/guides/rights-and-freedoms/chart-australian-treaty-ratifications-may-2012-human-rights-your-fingertips-human#

Beazley, J. (2026, February 3). Palestine Action Group plans march against Isaac Herzog’s visit despite protest restrictions. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/feb/03/palestine-action-group-march-isaac-herzog-ntwnfb#

Dastyari, A. (2024). Reason for alarm? The Roads and Crimes Legislation Amendment Act 2022 (NSW) and the diminishing right to protest in NSW. Australian Journal of Human Rights, 30(2), 191–210.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1323238X.2025.2462279

Department of Communities and Justice. (2022, April 1). Protecting communities from illegal protestors. NSW Government. https://dcj.nsw.gov.au/news-and-media/media-releases-archive/2022/protecting-communities-from-illegal-protestors.html

Gladstone, N. (2024, November 2). Big issues bringing more protests and problems to Sydney’s streets. The Sydney Morning Herald. https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/big-issues-bringing-more-protests-and-problems-to-sydney-s-streets-20241029-p5km7v.html

Mejia-Canales, D. (2024, May 6). Review into the Roads Act 1993 (NSW). Human Rights Law Centre. https://www.hrlc.org.au/app/uploads/2025/04/SUB_HRLC_NSW-Review-into-Roads-Act.pdf 

New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties. (2024, June 1). Review of Part 9, Division 7, section 144H of the Roads Act 1993 (NSW) [Submission]. https://assets.nationbuilder.com/nswccl/pages/6865/attachments/original/1720663411/2024.06.01_NSWCCL_Review_of_Part_9__Division_7_section_144H_of_the_Roads_Act_1993_.pdf

Roads Act 1993 (NSW). 

https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/2025-10-28/act-1993-033 

United Nations (1966, December 16). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights [Article 21]. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-civil-and-political-rights#

Visontay, E. (2022, December 2). Climate activist who blocked traffic on Sydney Harbour Bridge jailed for at least eight months. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/dec/02/climate-activist-who-blocked-traffic-on-sydney-harbour-bridge-jailed-for-at-least-eight-months