A report in today’s AFR suggests that the federal government could be backing away from a recommendation from the National Human Rights Consultation Committee that Australia introduce a statutory bill of rights at the federal level.
Last September Father Frank Brennan presented to Attorney-General Robert McClelland the report from the national consultation on human rights protection. Reflecting the views of 40,000 individuals, plus judges, law bodies, social justice organisations, church people and overseas experts, reinforced by commissioned research from Colmar Brunton, Father Brennan recommended a human rights Act.
Research and polling show extensive support for this approach.
But the AFR reports that Attorney-General Robert McClelland has acknowledged that the proposal is “very controversial”, both within the Labor Party and throughout the community.
The rights under discussion are those long since ratified by Australian governments, especially in the UN Civil and Political Rights and the economic and cultural rights conventions. The homeless, the disabled, mentally ill, old people, indigenous or Muslims often encounter violations of these rights at the hands of the Commonwealth and its agents. A law as proposed would reduce such abuse by ensuring Parliament would consider rights when legislating. Public servants would have to understand and accept rights as they implement policy. All this would be achieved by an ordinary Act of parliament, with the courts getting only the power to find an action of the Commonwealth inconsistent with legislated rights.
This modest but important proposal should find no resistance from a reform government. Why are we still waiting for a response? Action here has virtually no electoral risks. Most people would applaud. Of course there is opposition. Can this be the obstacle?
Let’s consider. Protecting the vulnerable is core business for most Christian bodies, as demonstrated by the many supportive church submissions.
But the only organised opposition comes, oddly, from the Australian Christian Lobby. Its recent petition to Parliament reflected wildly erroneous claims that the law proposed by Father Brennan was really about facilitating same sex marriage and abortion. And forcing churches to hire homosexual teachers in their schools. Along with Bob Carr and Cardinal George Pell, the ACL also asserts that the proposed ordinary Act of Parliament would undermine our democracy and improperly inflate the powers of “unelected judges”.
The most cursory reading of the Brennan report wipes out these claims.
Evangelicals will continue to rail against gay marriage and abortion as they are entitled to do. Their attempted takeover of a serious initiative designed to protect the vulnerable is another matter. Well organised and resourced, they may not feel the need for legal protection of their rights. But others do. Australians appear to support this law. It fits naturally with a Labor government committed to inclusion and the homeless. In the absence of any serious negatives, we should be able to expect a decision, and a human rights Act from the government within this parliamentary term. But we are still waiting!!
Susan Ryan is chair of the Australian Human Rights Group
Again, this article simply attempts to give minorities the right to assert their views on the majority. Minorities are adequately protected by existing laws although I accept that some minorities suffer from adverse discrimination, sometimes illegally. More laws won’t stop that. I note that Susan carefully evades the issue of whether religious schools will be able to legally discriminate in the employment of teachers etc.
Susan Ryan, I find I find it disturbing and totally unacceptable that Australian human rights lawyers only advocate for criminals, juvenile delinquents and illegal migrants and not for the human rights of unrepresented school children like my Australian born son.
My son is a victim of severe school bullying, neglect and education discrimination. He is also a victim of apprehended judicial abuse and gross judicial misconduct and the repeated unlawful editing of courtroom audiotapes and transcripts in order to pervert the course of justice and deny us the evidence of the shocking abuse we suffered, as detailed in my radio call to Chuck Brooks from Radio 4BC https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/media/2009/08/435571.mp3
I find Australia’s long silence and the lack of advocacy on this extremely disappointing. We are always told no one is above the law in Australia. But it is plain obvious that those with the right positions or connections and those related to Australian quasi royalty are untouchable and are indeed above the law. While my son and I are beneath the law. How can that be democracy?
And trust the Christian right to try and mislead us all on the power of “unelected judges”, when our judiciary is in fact politically appointed and this is actually “the main evil in the administration of justice in Australia” said Geoff Davies QC. Let the People Elect Judges http://mathaba.net/0_index.shtml?x=555335
I find it totally unacceptable that the judiciary is still politically appointed and not democratically elected. Nepotism and cronyism has no place in a true democracy.
“Labor has lost its sense of purpose and no longer stands for social justice embedded in a process for greater political equality for all its citizens. The party has moved to the centre right and in many critical areas is indistinguishable in its policies from the conservative coalition’s agenda. In Australia’s market democracy politicians are entrepreneurs who deliver political goods to the highest bidder. Both Labor and Liberal parties have been captured by neoconservative interests and offer essentially the same menu of neoliberal policies to manage the economy and society. …The political elite is also firmly against giving the electorate the right to a citizen-initiated referendum” from Erik Paul’s book, Little America Australia, the 51st State.
Coverage and further details:
Australia’s lone stance against civil rights bill:how juristocracy enables this and blocks debate http://www.mathaba.net/0_index.shtml?x=616222
QLD Governor Silent on Judicial Corruption Claims Against Brother http://www.mathaba.net/news/?x=621126
Armed Police Eject Mother From Queensland Parliament
http://mathaba.net/news/?x=620379
Governor of Queensland’s charade and judicial corruption denial continues http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/8/21/770060/-Governor-of-Queenslands-charade-and-judicial-corruption-denial-continues-
http://www.4bc.com.au/blogs/michael-smith-blog/corruption/20090814-ekj0.html