For the second time, the Tasmanian Law Reform Institute is urging its parliament to pass a Human Rights Act to benefit the citizens of the state. Following a strong recommendation in 2007, the TLRI has released its 2024 Update, calling for MPs to pass a Human Rights Act, for all laws passed by parliament to be compatible with it, and for a ’no rights without remedy’, direct way for Tasmanians to access justice if their rights are breached by bureaucrats.
Two Quadrant authors are alarmist in claiming that a national human rights Act would ‘entrench racism’ in Australia, leading civil liberties campaigner Dr Kristine Klugman says. It may be threat to the unwarranted privileges of the rich and ‘old white men’, but such an Act would provide a much fairer society with a ‘fair go’ for all, equally.
How close is Australia to having Human Rights Acts nationwide? Here’s a rundown by CLA President Dr Kristine Klugman. Her status report comes just as the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights is about to recommend a new federal framework for Australia’s national human rights regime. But all states and territories have active groups working to improve citizens’ access to a fair go in their own bailiwick.
Is the ‘notorious nation’ set to finally do the right thing, and protect its citizens with a Human Rights Act? Journalist Paul Gregoire examines the current situation and 2024-25 prospects for a ‘bill of rights’ that includes accessible, consistent and clear remedies for any breaches by bureaucrats.
An amended Human Rights Act for the Australian Capital Territory, tabled in September 2023, contains nation-leading clauses to ensure ’No Rights Without Remedy’ can become a model for a possible federal Human Rights Act in future. Celebrating the 20th anniversary of Australia’s first HR Act, the nation’s first Human Rights Minister, Tara Cheyne, has introduced changes in the ACT so that citizens from 2024 can seek formal conciliation if there is an alleged breach of their rights by the bureaucracy, which has a positive duty whenever possible to act consistently with human rights. She also praised CLA and Chris Stamford for our work in helping to make positive change happen,
CLA’s submission calling for a Human Rights Act for Australia, including ensuring there are ‘No Rights Without Remedy’, has been published on the parliament website (Sub No 51). The 31-page, easy-read submission has met with widespread praise for its comprehensiveness and how it marries the need for a national ethical infrastructure, ensures a fair go for both poor and rich, and also melds with the wellbeing Budget principle of delivering long-term improvement in the lives of citizens.
How is Australia improving – or otherwise – as a nation and a society? Are we becoming a fairer, more equal place to live, concentrating on what produces better outcomes for people? Is our traditional narrow focus on GDP doing us a disservice as a people? CLA’s HR Campaign Manager Chris Stamford examines new ways of measuring progress.
Jurisdictions throughout Australia are hell-bent on banning symbols they don’t like, when it is way the symbol or sign is used rather than the image itself that is the problem. CLA made this point in a submission to a parliamentary process in the ACT, pointing out that there are thousands of signs, symbols, gestures, chants that could – and do, at times – give offence when misused.
‘Human rights’ is a simple concept: the rights let you do what you reasonably want to do…without preventing someone else doing what they want to do. But they can get bound up in formal ‘legalese’. Here, CLA explains our understanding of what ‘human rights’ means as applied to Australia, and why we should have a national, or federal, Human Rights Act or bill of rights like NZ, Canada, the UK and the USA.
