Editor, West Australian, Sir: I respond to your report “Charter gets Right blast by Howard” by Amanda Banks , TWA 27 Aug 2009.
Over the last 30 years State and Federal Governments have pondered whether we should have a Human Rights Charter in Australia. Without failure, former leaders of Government and academics (generally right wing) oppose it because they claim it would be giving power from the Parliament to the judges, and argue there are other avenues in common law to pursue justice.
The fact of the matter is we need a Bill of Rights in Australia, preferably to be embedded in the Australian Constitution. But it would not get bi-partisan support. All we ordinary people want is a Bill of Rights and I’m confining myself to the criminal and penal system. A person is charged with a criminal offence and if the State fails to secure a conviction, the acquitted person should automatically have his costs reimbursed (as is done in the magistrates court in WA), and loss of earning and compensation for loss of liberty.
The likes of John Howard and the academics who oppose the Bill of Rights obviously have never been in a position of limited education and poverty. If they had a taste of an unprivileged life, they would realize the ordinary person can’t utilize common law because they simply can’t afford the legal costs of an action, not to mention if they lose, they are lumbered with the cost of the other side, be it the State or other.
You people up in the ivory tower, we ordinary people want a Bill of Rights, a lot of us put food for thought to the appropriate inquiries, and with the result to date nothing ever happens. The academics running the inquiry I suggest get their 30 pieces of silver and then we start all over again years later.
Lets have a Bill of Rights.
Brian G Tennant, Civil Liberties Australia, Perth WA