Understanding radicalisation requires looking at the full picture

This opinion piece was written by Human Rights Commissioner Lorraine Finlay, National Children's Commissioner Deb Tsobaris and Commission President Hugh de Kretser.

Australia is confronting a troubling shift in the nature of radicalisation. One of the most significant emerging challenges is the increasing number of children and young people being radicalised and embedded in extremist networks. That reality was the starting point for the Australian Human Rights Commission's recent submission to the Australian Parliament’s intelligence and security committee inquiry into the nature and drivers of radicalisation and extremism in Australia.

There is growing evidence about the risks facing young Australians online, including the increasing number of young people coming to the attention of counterterrorism authorities. Security agencies have warned that digital platforms are creating new opportunities for extremist recruitment, influence and mobilisation, with some children entering radicalisation pathways at remarkably young ages.

For that reason, and responding to the inquiry’s terms of reference, our submission focused on how children and young people are being radicalised online and how to prevent it. It examined how young people are exposed to extreme content, how vulnerabilities can be exploited by malicious actors and how policymakers can better respond before radicalisation escalates into violence.

Suggestions that the Commission is downplaying the significance of Islamic extremism are wrong. That is not our position and it is not what our submission says.

Radicalisation is a complex phenomenon with multiple drivers. Young people can be drawn towards extremist violence through ideology, personal grievances, social isolation, exposure to harmful online content, or a combination of factors. Effective policy requires us to understand those pathways and respond to them before they result in harm.

The Australian Federal Police outlined similar concerns in their submission to the same inquiry: Counter terrorism investigators in Australia, and throughout the world, are recording more instances of individuals who are not dogmatic about political or religious causes but are drawn to grievance, violence, and misogyny. In the AFP’s youth terrorism case load, religiously motivated violent extremism is predominant but mixed and unclear ideologies are becoming more common.

While the radicalisation pathways are changing, religiously motivated extremism remains a significant and ongoing driver of terrorism in Australia. Any effective response to radicalisation must recognise that reality, confront it honestly, and support efforts to prevent and disrupt violence motivated by it. Equally, we must not treat religious communities as collectively responsible for individuals who claim to act in their name. All the world’s major religions uphold the sanctity of human life and condemn the murder of innocent people. Terrorism claimed to be committed in the name of religion rests on a profound distortion and rejection of religious principles.

It is also essential to recognise that antisemitism is a recurring feature of extremist movements across ideological divides, fuelling conspiracy theories, division and violence. It must be challenged and confronted wherever it appears. The antisemitic terror attack at Bondi was a horrific manifestation of harm caused by this hatred. The Antisemitism Royal Commission and other inquiries are examining the connections of the attackers to Islamic State.

Events that followed the Bondi attack underscored the dangers of terrorism and hate crimes to all communities in Australia. In January, a man threw a homemade bomb into a crowd of Aboriginal people and allies at a protest in Perth. The next month, Western Australian police arrested a young man for allegedly plotting terror attacks against Muslims and others, apparently motivated by white supremacist ideology. The same month the media reported on a wave of attacks targeting gay and bisexual teenagers in Sydney. And in 2019, an Australian man attacked Muslim worshippers in Christchurch killing 51 people. We must continue to speak out against hatred and prejudice whenever and wherever it occurs.

The fact that our submission discussed issues such as misogyny, online grievance-based movements and the "manosphere" does not mean we regard those issues as more significant than religiously motivated extremism. Rather, it reflects the inquiry's focus on the drivers of radicalisation and the growing evidence that young people can be drawn towards extremist views through a variety of connected pathways, particularly in digital environments.

The Commission's position is straightforward. Australia needs an evidence-based response to radicalisation. It should focus on prevention as well as enforcement, respond to the growing risks facing children and young people, and address the diverse pathways through which people are drawn towards extremist violence. Understanding those pathways does not mean overlooking the threat posed by religiously motivated extremism or the danger of antisemitism. On the contrary, it strengthens our capacity to respond to them.

About Lorraine Finlay, Human Rights Commissioner

Lorraine Finlay

Human Rights Commissioner

Lorraine Finlay, Human Rights Commissioner, brings legal and academic expertise to protect freedoms and promote justice across Australia.

Learn more about Lorraine Finlay

Media contact

Email: media@humanrights.gov.au or phone: 0457 281 897