Arezo Zoe Safi, Identity Misuse, and the Defamatory Submission Targeting Hazaras

Recently, I became aware that some individuals whose names appeared as authors of a notorious submission, one laden with falsehoods, accusations, and hatred against the Hazara community in Australia, have expressed remorse. Some even claim they were unaware that their names had been used at all.

Assuming, for the sake of speculation, that some individuals were indeed unaware of their names being used, there are legal venues resolving the issue. I looked online and realized that if a person's name is used in a document (any) without knowing or giving consent, serious concerns might be raised regarding misrepresentation and harm. 

Let's approach this issue with a few questions: What can a person do when their name is used in a document, online or offline, without their knowledge or consent? What legal options are available, and who might be held accountable?

In this case, Arezo Zoe Safi, a registered solicitor, and her cousin Atal Zahid Safi appear to be central figures in this matter. Both of them are family members of Mohammad Masoom Stanekzai, a prominent Afghan politician who formerly led the National Directorate of Security (NDS) and later served as the acting Minister of Defense and who is accused of persecution of Hazara non-violent demonstrations. Given her professional standing, Ms. Safi is legally authorized to provide advice and represent clients. It is troubling, then, if she and her firm, Safi Legal, are implicated in a document that misuses individuals’ identities.

I looked up online to find out what a person could do if his or her name is used without context. I found out that using someone’s name without consent is not, in itself, a criminal offense under Australian law. But if that use results in privacy violations, defamation, or identity misuse, there may be grounds for legal action. This is where the Privacy Act 1988 becomes relevant: 

1) Breach of Privacy—If someone promotes hate or misinformation by using someone's name, it may constitute a breach of privacy, especially if it causes personal or reputational harm.

2) Defamation - If someone's name is used for promoting falsehoods or harmful narratives. This is particularly relevant to those who did not consent or were unaware of their names being used. 

So, what can be done?

If I were the individuals whose names were misused by Arezo Zoe Safi, I would pursue a formal complaint under the Privacy Act of 1998.

When a Lawyer Spreads Harm: Arezo Zoe Safi’s hostile rhetoric against the Hazara community

In my earlier post, I forgot to mention an important point: Arezo Zoe Safi is actively spreading hatred and hostility toward the Hazara community in Australia. Arezo, who was born and raised in Australia and has likely only visited Afghanistan briefly, has no direct lived experience of the country’s ethnic tensions, yet she chooses to vilify Hazara advocates speaking out against systemic violence. She is the niece of Mohammad Masoom Stanekzai, a prominent Afghan politician who formerly led the National Directorate of Security (NDS) and later served as the acting Minister of Defense. 

On her Facebook page in 2023, she, while unemotionally controlled, launched a disturbing attack against Sitarah Mohammadi, a respected Hazara lawyer and activist, questioning why Sitarah should be allowed to speak about the ongoing genocidal violence targeting the Hazara people. Arezo appears particularly outraged at any suggestion that Pashtun groups, among others, bear responsibility for these atrocities. In her post, she dismissively refers to Sitarah as “an amateur advocate,” despite Sitarah’s impressive credentials: a provost scholar at the University of Oxford (2019), a BA in International Relations and Human Rights from Monash University, and a Juris Doctor from Monash Law School. Sitarah has also published several academic articles. Also, read the comments below her post and see how she engages with commentators by spreading lies and hatred.

A screenshot from Arezo Zoe Safi's Facebook page

A quick search of Arezo Zoe Safi reveals not much about professional achievement, only a pattern of inflammatory and divisive rhetoric. So, where does her virulent attitude and false confidence come from? It appears rooted in a sense of ethnic privilege. Arezo, as a member of the Pashtun ethnic group, seems to leverage her identity to perpetuate a dangerous sense of ethnic superiority, even from within Australia. This privilege emboldens her to attack Hazara individuals and silence their voices.

The most disturbing aspect of Arezo's conduct is her misuse of legal language to legitimize her claims. She notably uses the hashtags #hatespeech and #racialdiscrimination, terms that, under the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (RDA) in Australia, are associated with serious legal implications. Ironically, the very rhetoric she employs against the Hazara community appears to violate the principles outlined in the RDA. In the 2021 submission, Arezo is listed as a solicitor, and it is evident that much of the inflammatory language can be attributed to her and it appears that she is the primary person responsible for the submission. 

This makes her actions not only deeply offensive but also potentially unlawful. The Hazara community in Australia has grounds to pursue legal recourse under the RDA, potentially holding Arezo and her collaborators accountable for hate speech and racial discrimination.

At its core, Arezo's message is clear: Hazara people should stay silent about the historical and ongoing pain they have endured under Pashtun-dominated rule. Rather than offering empathy or seeking understanding, she chooses to attack the victims. This is not only cruel, it is dangerous.