Charlie Hebdo and religious vilification laws in Australia

While the Western world has generally championed the virtue of freedom of speech in the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo shootings, the protests erupting in other parts of the world since the release of the magazine's latest edition highlight the flip-side of the freedom of speech debate – the right to freedom from racial and religious vilification.

The distinction between racial and religious vilification is often blurred. For example, these protests relate to Carlie Hebdo's portrayal of Muslims, especially the depiction of the Prophet Mohammed. However, the typical Muslim illustrated by the magazine is Middle Eastern, despite the fact that the Middle East and North Africa represent only about 20% of the world's Muslims. Does this then constitute racial or religious vilification, or both?