Aus v US Human Rights Essay Flashcards
1
Q
Constitutional rights protection in USA
A
- Bill of rights protects several political/legal rights: freedom of speech, assembly, religion (1st Amendment), right to silence (5th)
- However results in inflexible rights, Constitution hard to change e.g. 2nd Amendment (right to bear arms)
2
Q
Constitutional rights protection in Australia
A
- Few specified constitutional rights vs US, High Court has discovered some implied rights e.g. freedom of political communication
- E.g.: right to vote (S41), freedom of religion (116), right to trial by jury in federal indictable cases (S80)
- Aus constitutional rights more specific and narrow
3
Q
Statutory rights protection in USA
A
- US less reliant on statutory law
- Example is Civil Rights Act 1964
- Also reluctant to legislate international human rights law
4
Q
Statutory rights in Australia
A
- More reliant on statutory law. Has made their rights more flexible and adaptable but also more vulnerable
- E.g. Migration Act 1958, RD Act 1975, Native Title Act 1993
- Statutory bills of rights in certain states e.g. VIC
- AHRC - body that resolves human rights complaints, codified by statute
5
Q
Common law rights in USA
A
- Low reliance on common law rights, as most common law is legal rights, which USA constitutionally protect e.g. 5th Amendment
- E.g. fair trial rights (natural justice, due process)
6
Q
Common law rights in AUS
A
- Protects several legal rights e.g. right to silence, presumption of innocence
- Also protects legal rights such as freedom of speech, association
- Does leave them vulnerable
7
Q
International law in USA
A
- Have not signed UN international treaties and covenants since 2002
- Don’t want to give themselves legal weaknesses against foreign rivals
8
Q
International law in AUS
A
- Australia relies on international law a lot more heavily
- e.g. CERD –> RD Act 1975, ICCPR –> AHRC Act 1986
- Judicial system influenced e.g. Mabo v Queensland 2, judge said ICCPR influenced his decision
