DistantNews
Support us
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia /Crime & Justice

Australian Principal Wins Court Case Over Alleged Antisemitic Comments, Eyes Return to Job

From ABC Australia · () English

Translated from English, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.

At a glance

News Named sources Outcome reported
  • A New South Wales school principal, Sheikh Abdulghani Albaf, has won a court case against the state's education authority.
  • The Supreme Court ruled he was denied procedural fairness during an investigation into alleged antisemitic social media comments.
  • Albaf hopes to return to his position as principal of New Madinah College.

Sheikh Abdulghani Albaf, a principal at New Madinah College in Young, New South Wales, is poised to potentially return to his role after a Supreme Court ruling in his favor. Albaf had stood down earlier this year pending an investigation into alleged antisemitic commentary on social media.

The court is absolutely correct in saying the committee failed to discharge its duties appropriately.

โ€” Stephen BlanksSheikh Albaf's lawyer commenting on the Supreme Court's ruling.

The Supreme Court found that the NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA) and the education minister did not provide Albaf with due procedural fairness during the investigation. His lawyer, Stephen Blanks, welcomed the ruling, stating that the committee failed to discharge its duties appropriately. Albaf had previously given an undertaking not to make further social media posts, which he has reportedly complied with.

He gave an undertaking in January, well before NESA's decision, that he will not make any further social media posts and he's complied with that undertaking.

โ€” Stephen BlanksSheikh Albaf's lawyer highlighting his client's compliance with his commitment.

The investigation by NESA followed a 2025 inquiry by NSW and federal education departments into comments about Zionism made over several years from an account linked to Sheikh Albaf. In February, NESA had warned the school it risked deregistration if Albaf was not removed from his position.

I have concluded the Committeeโ€™s determination must be set aside, it will have to revisit its determination in light of all the relevant information it receives.

โ€” Acting Justice Monika Schmidt AMThe Supreme Court judge explaining the implications of the ruling for NESA's investigation.

Acting Justice Monika Schmidt AM noted in her judgment that Albaf had been denied procedural fairness because NESA did not disclose its findings or offer him an opportunity to be heard before adopting them. The court's decision means NESA must revisit its determination, and both Albaf and the college will have the right to review any future decision regarding the college's registration.

If the result of its further decision-making process is a recommendation to the Minister that the Collegeโ€™s registration be cancelled, because Sheikh Albaf is not a fit and proper person, both he and the College will have a right to pursue a review of that decision.

โ€” Acting Justice Monika Schmidt AMThe Supreme Court judge outlining the potential next steps and review rights.
DistantNews Editorial

Originally published by ABC Australia in English. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.