One Ring To Bind Them All

Fr Brennan has recommended that a Human Rights Act be adopted. Included are the following recommendations:

Recommendation 22

The Committee recommends that, if economic and social rights are listed in a federal Human Rights Act, those rights not be justiciable and that complaints be heard by the Australian Human Rights Commission. Priority should be given to the following:

· the right to an adequate standard of living—including adequate food, clothing and housing

· the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health

· the right to education.

Recommendation 23

The Committee recommends that a limitation clause for derogable civil and political rights, similar to that contained in the Australian Capital Territory and Victorian human rights legislation, be included in any federal Human Rights Act.

Recommendation 24

The Committee recommends that the following non-derogable civil and political rights be included in any federal Human Rights Act, without limitation:

· The right to life. Every person has the right to life. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of life. The death penalty may not be imposed for any offence.

· Protection from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. A person must not be

– subjected to torture

or

– treated or punished in a cruel, inhuman or degrading way

or

– subjected to medical or scientific experimentation without his or her full, free and informed consent.

· Freedom from slavery or servitude. A person must not be held in slavery or servitude.

· Retrospective criminal laws.

– A person must not be found guilty of a criminal offence as a result of conduct that was not a criminal offence when the conduct was engaged in.

– A penalty imposed on a person for a criminal offence must not be greater than the penalty that applied to the offence when it was committed.

– If a penalty for an offence is reduced after a person committed the offence but before the person is sentenced for that offence, the reduced penalty should be imposed.

– Nothing in the foregoing affects the trial or punishment of any person for any act or omission that was a criminal offence under international law at the time the act or omission occurred.

· Freedom from imprisonment for inability to fulfil a contractual obligation. A person must not be imprisoned solely on the ground of inability to fulfil a contractual obligation.

· Freedom from coercion or restraint in relation to religion and belief. No person will be subject to coercion that would impair his or her freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his or her choice.

The right to a fair trial should also not be limited.

Recommendation 25

The Committee recommends that the following additional civil and political rights be included in any federal Human Rights Act:

· the right to freedom from forced work

· the right to freedom of movement

· the right to privacy and reputation

· the right to vote

· the right to freedom of thought, conscience and belief

· freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs

· the right to freedom of expression

· the right to peaceful assembly

· the right to freedom of association

· the right to marry and found a family

· the right of children to be protected by family, society and the State

· the right to take part in public life

· the right to property

· the right to liberty and security of person

· the right to humane treatment when deprived of one’s liberty

· the right to due process in criminal proceedings

· the right not to be tried or punished more than once

· the right to be compensated for wrongful conviction.

Human rights protection is a mixed blessing. Any such legislation that does not entrench a right to free speech in such a way that overcomes the current idiotic laws which may, for example, result in the gaoling of people for ridiculing religion, and which has resulted in the gaoling of Frederick Toben for his anti-Semitic remarks, is worthless.

The sad fact is that this law will be imposed on the people by the parliament. The true nature of a Bill of Rights is one imposed on the parliament by the people. The current proposal does not envision a constitutional amendment, as it is extremely unlikely that it would be agreed to in its current form.

Instead the people will have this pious effluent inflicted on them by a smug righteous soft left government.

There is also a section of the report calling for compliance with Australia’s international obligations. The UN has passed resolutions calling for laws to protect religion from defamation. There is a risk that in future this will be enshrined as a human right and that it may become an ‘international obligation’ for Australia. This is offensive to the concept freedom of speech. This may suit a cleric like Fr Brennan, but it is an abomination in terms of free speech.

Ultimately, the legislation will be a sad compromise. It will be bent to accommodate current law. It is unlikely the government will allow it to overrule current legislation like the Federal sedition laws. In the end it will be a horrible compromise which will not serve the community well. If we are going to enshrine fundamental rights in law, it should be done as a constitutional amendment, which will lead to a fulsome public debate involving ordinary citizens rather than merely the chattering classes.