Kamaljit Kaur Athwal v State of Queensland

Kamaljit Kaur Athwal, an initiated Sikh who wears a ceremonial sword known as a Kirpan as part of her religious faith, challenged the constitutionality of Queensland's Weapons Act 1990, which prohibits the carrying of a knife in public places or schools without a reasonable excuse. The Act was amended to allow the possession of a knife for genuine religious purposes in public places but did not extend this exception to school grounds. This raised issues for initiated Sikhs who are required to wear the Kirpan at all times. The High Court was asked to determine if the State legislation was inconsistent with section 10 of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth), which prohibits racial discrimination.

The court examined whether the State legislation deprived initiated Sikhs of the enjoyment of a human right or fundamental freedom to the extent that it was enjoyed by persons of another race, and if there was an inconsistency between section 10 of the RDA and the State legislation. The court considered the practical operation of the law and its direct relationship with the differential enjoyment of human rights, as outlined in previous High Court decisions. The applicant argued that the legislation prevented initiated Sikhs from entering school grounds due to their religious beliefs, which amounted to racial discrimination. The State contended that there was only an indirect connection between the legislation and the applicant's ability to enjoy human rights.

In its decision, the court found that the legislation did not create a direct relationship with the differential enjoyment of human rights as required by section 10 of the RDA. It concluded that the legislation was not inconsistent with the RDA as it was not motivated by discriminatory intent and served a legitimate purpose of maintaining safety in schools. The applicant's argument that the legislation directly resulted in differential enjoyment of human rights was not supported by the court.

The court dismissed the application and made no order as to costs.