In a move that can only be described as "better late than never, but we're still not sure about the rest," New South Wales police have withdrawn charges against Eyad Shadid - a 25-year-old Palestinian Australian man arrested during February's anti-Isaac Herzog rally - just hours after confirming they'd drop any charges laid under a law that's no longer on the books.
Shadid was arrested near a group of Muslim men praying when police swooped in. The charges: refusing to comply with a police direction and resisting or hindering an officer. But on Wednesday, a police prosecutor told Downing Centre Local Court they were withdrawing both. Shadid's lawyer, Nick Hanna, put it bluntly: "The evidence served by the police in this case clearly established that Mr Shadid did not commit any offence and he should never have been charged to begin with."
This comes after NSW Police Commissioner Mal Lanyon told ABC Radio that - pending a review - police would drop charges laid under the now-defunct Public Assembly Restriction Declaration (Pard) law. The Pard was struck down last month by the Court of Appeal, which ruled it unconstitutional. The law had been introduced after December's Bondi Beach terror attack (where 15 people were killed and more than 40 injured when two gunmen opened fire on a Jewish Hanukah celebration), giving police power to restrict all protests for 90 days after a terrorist attack.
It remains unclear how many of the 30 protesters charged after the February rally will benefit from this sudden burst of legal clarity. Shadid's charges were dropped separately from the broader review. Meanwhile, police are also investigating whether directions given under a separate "major events" declaration - which gave expanded move-on and search powers - were lawful. Premier Chris Minns had previously insisted that because the anti-Herzog protest was also covered by that declaration, charges would still stand. But the 30 protesters face various offences including assault police officer, offensive behavior, and throwing objects - charges that may or may not fall under the Pard.
Lawyer Osman Samin, representing five of the 14 protesters whose matters were adjourned Wednesday morning, told the court: "The Pard has fallen over and that might have consequences for a number of these prosecutions." The Palestine Action Group has hinted it might challenge the constitutional validity of the major events declaration too - which is typically used for major sporting or music events, not for stifling political dissent.
Hanna, speaking outside court, hoped charges would be dropped for all 30 people, calling attempts to untangle who was charged under the Pard an "artificial exercise." His take: "The simple reality is that the police crackdown was, in no small part, due to the police refusing to facilitate the peaceful march from town hall to Parliament House, and that refusal was based almost entirely, if not entirely, on the existence of that Pard."
The full bench of the Court of Appeal found that restricting all protests to protect "social cohesion" was not a "constitutionally legitimate purpose." Legal experts say this landmark judgment could have far-reaching consequences, limiting future government attempts to control speech and protests under the guise of keeping everyone friendly. Progress: one charge dropped, 29 to go.