NSW government suffered another legal blow over anti-Israel speech
NSW Supreme Court questions minister's interference in school principal dismissal over anti-Israel social media posts
A NSW Supreme Court judge has raised concerns that the state’s education minister, Prue Car, interfered in what was supposed to be an independent investigation into an Islamic school principal over anti-Zionist posts.
Last Friday, Assistant Justice Monika Schmidt overturned a ruling by an Education Department committee that Sheikh Abdulghani Albaf was not a fit and proper person to hold the position of principal at New Madinah College, in Young, after he made a series of posts attacking Israel in 2023 and 2024.
The judgment reveals close contact between the investigator looking into the case for an independent committee within the department and the offices of Ms Car and the then-acting minister, Courtney Houssos.
It also shows that the investigator tasked with looking into the case was aware that the minister did not want Sheikh Albaf to return to school when the new year started in February.
Under the law, the committee was required to act independently of the minister when recommending to her whether or not she should find Sheikh Albaf a fit and proper person.
“The evidence does raise a concern, I accept, about whether these requirements have been observed,” Justice Schmidt said in her ruling.
However, she made no ruling on the issue and instead decided in favour of Sheikh Albaf because he had been denied procedural fairness in other ways.
“... the evidence does establish that the Sheikh was denied the procedural fairness he was entitled to receive, before the Committee made and published its determination that he was not a fit and proper person. It having adopted an approach which needs to be revisited, if justice is to be done,” Justice Schmidt said
“Given that the challenged determination must be set aside, the Committee will be able to take the necessary steps to ensure that it does not take such an irrelevant consideration into account, when it makes any further decision about Sheikh Albaf,” Justice Schmidt said.
Sheikh Albaf’s social media posts included calling Israel a “Zionist terrorist” state and describing “Zionists and all who support Zionism” as “simply [having] no moral compass whatsoever”. In a post in January 2024, he shared, ”May Allah destroy the Zionist terrorist regime. May they burn in the lowest pits of hellfire for their oppression aggression.”
After the Bondi massacre, the NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA) “received media enquiries” about Sheikh Albaf’s posts, Justice Schmidt said.
On 19 December – four days after the massacre – NESA asked the college to provide information to a senior inspector, Brooke Prideaux, who would prepare a report for the committee.
It was the second time NESA investigated the posts – an earlier probe last year resulted in changes to the school’s social media policy but no findings against the principal.
After receiving NESA’s notice in December, New Madinah College investigated the posts and decided that Sheik Albaf could continue, but put him on six months probation.
Sheikh Albaf voluntarily stood down as principal during the investigations.
In February, the NESA committee said it disagreed with the school’s assessment and was planning to find Sheikh Albaf was not fit and proper.
It invited a response from him. He instead took the Education Department to court, resulting in the airing in public of details of the extensive involvement in the NESA investigation process of the offices of Ms Car and Ms Houssos.
These included:
NESA initially refusing to give New Madinah College more time to respond to its concerns after the minister’s office said that “this has been going on for too long” – even though the school had previously been told the demands wouldn’t be pursued until February and many of the staff were on holidays
A December 18 handwritten note to NESA from acting minister Houssos in which she said: “I note in the school’s response to the initial concerns, they said this does not reflect the principal’s current values. This is directly contradicted by the recent offensive and hateful posts. Please keep me updated on your investigations.”
NESA’s investigator, Ms Prideaux, and other authority staff being aware that Car did not want Sheikh Albaf to return to his job, but failing to disclose this to him
NESA CEO Paul Martin telling the chair of the school’s board that there was a lot of political pressure and Sheikh Albaf should stand down until the matter “went to sleep”
Under cross-examination, Ms Prideaux also gave evidence that during a committee meeting to decide Sheikh Albaf’s fate the executive director of teaching standards at NESA, Lyn Kirkby, said “that the minister did not want the principal at the school when the students resumed on 2 February; that this had already been communicated to her superiors; that it had also been discussed before the meeting; and that she was aware of this, before she prepared her report; but that she had not mentioned it there,” Justice Schmidt said in her ruling.
The NSW Education Department didn’t answer Deepcut’s questions about the minister’s involvement because the matter is still before the court. The parties have been given two weeks to confer on next steps following Sheik Albaf’s victory.
“NESA acknowledges the judgment by the NSW Supreme Court on Friday 24 July,” a department spokesperson said.
Thank you again for covering these stories of people’s lives being upended when they speak out against the brutality of Israel and the horrific Zionist expansionist ethnic cleansing underway for all to see. Those that defend Israeli war crimes and discipline others who criticize Israel are immoral.
Thank you for informing us about the improper conduct of our governments. Without your reporting, we wouldn't know about "decision/conclusion first, now go find the supporting evidence" independent investigations. Is it normal practice for a judge to basically guide the "independent" decision-maker in how to do their job without running foul of denial of natural justice/procedural fairness? Looks like the department/authority is way too compliant with the minister's-office's wants, but NSW has a long history of corruption to learn from.