The Human Rights Commission Is Investigating Why Australia Gave Katie Hopkins A Visa

The Australian Human Rights Commission is investigating Australia’s decision to grant far-right commentator Katie Hopkins a visa last year.

Hopkins was granted a visa last year to reportedly appear on Big Brother VIP. However, after arriving in the middle of Sydney’s July lockdown and subsequently breaking strict quarantine requirements, her visa was quickly cancelled and she was deported and fined $1000.

Hopkins bragged about opening the door of her hotel room naked and unmasked to “call out” COVID restrictions. During her livestream at the time, she called COVID lockdowns the “greatest hoax in human history” and asserted that she was trying to “frighten” the guards by being unmasked and naked. To this day, it is unclear how the nudity helped to prove her point.

But the Human Rights Commission is now investigating whether she should’ve ever been granted a visa in the first place after receiving a complaint from the Australian Muslim Advocacy Network (AMAN).

The complaint was lodged off the back of correspondence between AMAN and the Home Affairs Department, in which a spokesperson argued that while the risk of vilification is important to recognise, this must be balanced “against Australia’s well-established tradition of freedom of expression” when granting visas. Essentially, the government’s response was that Hopkins’ history of racism and discrimination falls within freedom of expression.

It’s also worth noting that the reason her visa was granted in the first place was “on the basis of potential benefit to the economy” from her appearing on Big Brother VIP.

In addition to being permanently banned from Twitter for violating the “hateful conduct policy”, Hopkins went on a tour of South Africa to report on “anti-white racism” and once called for a Nazi-style “final solution” to the 2017 Manchester bombing. As AMAN argued, Hopkins’ history of hate-speech is too long and documented to simply be put down to freedom of expression.

“It can be reasonably inferred from this statement that Ms Hopkins’ freedom of expression, and those who would agree with her in Australia, was given more weight than the human rights of Australians who would be adversely affected by vilification,” AMAN’s submission to the AHRC said. “It is also a reasonable inference that the Minister does not believe that hate speech is best countered by prohibition but by more free speech.”

AMAN’s lawyer, Rita Jabri Markwell, went so far as to assert that the government is “more prepared to take a stance on COVID than on racism.”

“It’s important for every Australian to feel like they matter and that means the government can’t pick and choose when it decides to protect Australians,” she said. “It needs to protect all of us equally.”

Further Assessment Should Have Been Required

The AHRC investigation comes after AMAN penned a letter to Scott Morrison at the time Hopkins’ visa was first granted, noting that further character assessment should’ve been required.

“The decision to allow Katie Hopkins into Australia for a public-facing purpose is highly controversial and should have triggered a serious character assessment,” the letter from AMAN’s Rita Jabri-Markwell said.

“Hopkins has socialised and mainstreamed the conspiracy theory of an ‘Islamic invasion’ and ‘Islamic takeover’ to broad public audiences, heightening the risk to families and communities who experience hate speech, harassment and threats in public places and other forms of hate crime.”

But despite her extensive history of racism and hate-speech, Hopkins was ultimately granted a visa while more than 30,000 Australians were still stranded overseas at the time.

Hopkins has already been deported and likely will never be granted another Australian visa, but the investigation will hold the Australian Government accountable for the decision and will hopefully prevent similar situations in future.