Rights Flashcards
What are human rights
No universal/ legalistic def
Basic moral/ legal entitlements that exist for all human beings irrespective of any personal qualities/ characteristics
Fundamental prerequisites to lead a minimally good life beyond mere survival
Mandatory
International human rights law
Establishes principles and guidelines about how Aus should treat its citizens but generally does not govern the behaviour and conduct of Aus citizens (responsibility of Aus domestic law)
International declarations
Non binding agreement that sets out aspirations or intentions of countries (or international organizations) who are party to it
Universal declaration of human rights
Adopted by all 192 members of UN
Has been translated into 337 languages-> global significance
Inspired the creation of more than 80 international treaties, declarations and agreements
(Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (1979) )
International treaties
Legally binding agreements between countries (or international organizations) in which they undertake to follow the obligations set out in the agreement and implement them in domestic law
How are discrimination rights protected federally and in Vic
S12 Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth)= unlawful to refuse a person residential accomodation on basis of their race, nationality or ethnicity
S16 Equality Opportunity Act 2010 (VIC)= unlawful for an employer to discriminate against a person based on gender
HOWEVER
statutes may also establish exceptions to the general principles against discrimination
How does the VIC Charter apply
Required MPs explicitly articulate whether new leg uphold or restricts the rights in the Charter through Statements of Compatibility
(MPs are discouraged from introducing laws that breach human rights due to political backlash) ( complex issues regarding human rights are debated and resolved publicly by democratically elected law makers)
The charter imposes obligations on public authorities (VIC police, local councils dept of edu) to act compatibility with HR and give proper consideration to human rights when making decisions
Courts and tribunals must interpret all vic laws in a way in a way that upholds the HR outlined in the charter as far as this is possible
The Supreme Court has the power to declare that a law or provision is inconsistent with HR but does not have the power to strike it down
Restrictions of the charter
20 rights are not absolute or unrestricted- includes a general limitations clause which allows public authorities (including VIC plmt and govt) to restrict HR in vic, it has no impact on new laws developed by cth plmt. As cth laws usually apply to all Aus, they may infringe upon the rights of vic
(Aus doesn’t have national charter)
The charter does not establish a right for victorians to bring a case against against the vic plmt for creating laws that breach the charter
Laws created prior to 2006 did not require a statement of compatibility and the human rights implications of many laws may not have been debated or considered
strengths of statute law (rights)
allows avenue for parties to seek remedies- discourages breaches- upholds social cohesion
explicit and robust protection of certain rights (cth and states statutes relevant to discrim. that cover a broad range of protected characteristics)
Plmt can make statute to protect HR when the need arises- allows rights protection to evolve as community standard changes
Weaknesses of statute law (rights)
evidence may be difficult to provide- defendant may have an excuse that could be considered reasonable is defence of their actions/decisions
there are exemptions to laws
damages cannot return the plaintiff to the emotional position before the breach
in a diverse and multicultural society, interpretation of certain rights may differ
Plmt can pass new laws or amend laws that remove HR previously protected in leg - not enshrined in constitution
Right to legal rep - statute
Both statute and common law
S25 VCHRR- ‘rights in criminal proceedings’- protects an accused persons right to:
Have adequate time and facilities to communicate w a lawyer
Be tried in person and defend themselves personally or through a lawyer
To be told of the right to obtain legal aid if they have no lawyer
Right to legal rep- common law e.g
Dietrich v The Queen:
Applied w VLA but needed to plead guilty for rep
Went to trial w/o rep (complex trial, 40 days) -> imprisonment-> appeal w HC
To actualise right to fair trial, right to legal rep needed= judge can adjourn case until accused obtains legal rep (serious criminal charge)
NOT at public’s expense
Strengthening of rights e.g
Certain Children v Min. For Families and children:
After the govt decision to transfer children to Barwon prison was deemed unlawful, the SC strengthened the rights of the VCHRR including the right to humane treatment whilst detained & protection of best interests of children
Strengths of common law in protecting HR
Courts indep of plmt and can establish precedent free from political pressures
Courts can make decisions to establish HR in areas where plmt has not established HR
Courts can infer HR without needing to consider how they might need to be limited
Courts can highlight to plmt gaps in the law that protect HR which may encourage plmt to change the law
Historically, courts have been able to protect HR and plmt has not overly interfered w common law
Weaknesses of common law in protecting HR
Common laws aren’t always easy to define/ identify (as opposed to statutory rights)
Courts must wait for a case to come before them to be able to declare the existence of HR
plmt as supreme law making body of Aus can abrogate common laws
Often courts are reluctant to recognise certain HR leaving it up to plmt to protect those rights
Judges are limited in applying the law to the case before them and cannot extend their decision to human rights or issues that are not in dispute in the case